ReviewDrug safety2004
Benefits and risks of pharmacological agents used for the treatment of menorrhagia.
Review in Drug safety, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Getting back on track to meet global anaemia reduction targets: a Lancet Haematology Commission.The Lancet. Haematology · 2025Review
- Use of medical, surgical and complementary treatments among women with fibroids.European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2014Article
- Caring for the breast cancer survivor's health and well-being.World journal of clinical oncology · 2014Review
- Satisfaction and health-related quality of life in women with heavy menstrual bleeding; results from a non-interventional trial of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or conventional medical therapy.International journal of women's health · 2014Article
- Heavy menstrual flow: current and future trends in management.Reviews in obstetrics & gynecology · 2013Article
- Challenges in the gynecologic care of premenopausal women with breast cancer.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2011Review
- Review
- A benefit-risk review of systemic haemostatic agents: part 2: in excessive or heavy menstrual bleeding.Drug safety · 2008Review
- Thermal balloon endometrial ablation for dysfunctional uterine bleeding: an evidence-based analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2004Article
- Dengue: Moving from Current Standard of Care to State-of-the-Art Treatment.Current treatment options in infectious diseasesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Menorrhagia affects the lives of many women. The assessment of menstrual flow is highly subjective and gauging the severity of the condition by objective assessment of menstrual blood loss is impractical. In treating menorrhagia, the primary aim should be to improve quality of life. Women are willing to undergo quite invasive treatment in order to achieve this. Drug therapy is the initial treatment of choice and the only option for those who wish to preserve their reproductive function. Despite the availability of a number of drugs, there is a general lack of an evidence-based approach, marked variation in practice and continuing uncertainty regarding the most appropriate therapy. Adverse effects and problems with compliance also undermine the success of medical treatment. This article reviews the available literature to compare the efficacy and tolerability of different medical treatments for menorrhagia. Tranexamic acid and mefenamic acid are among the most effective first-line drugs used to treat menorrhagia. Despite being used extensively in the past, oral luteal phase norethisterone is probably one of the least effective agents. Women requiring contraception have a choice of the combined oral contraceptive pill, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or long-acting progestogens. Danazol, gestrinone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues are all effective in terms of reducing menstrual blood loss but adverse effects and costs limit their long-term use. They have a role as second-line drugs for a short period of time in women awaiting surgery. While current evidence suggests that the LNG-IUS is an effective treatment, further evaluation, including long-term follow up, is awaited. Meanwhile, the quest continues for the ideal form of medical treatment for menorrhagia--one that is effective, affordable and acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.