SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Cyclical progestogens for heavy menstrual bleeding.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 178 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cyclical progestogens for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Combined hormonal contraceptives for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Surgery versus medical therapy for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System (52 mg) for Idiopathic Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2016Pooled it
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus medical therapy for menorrhagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2014Pooled it
- Use of mixed-treatment-comparison methods in estimating efficacy of treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding.European journal of medical research · 2013Pooled it
- The efficacy of medical management of leiomyoma-associated heavy menstrual bleeding: a mini review.F&S reports · 2024Article
- Rates of medical or surgical treatment for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: the ECLIPSE trial 10-year observational follow-up study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Observational
- Article
- Heavy menstrual bleeding and health-associated quality of life in women with von Willebrand's disease.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2016Article
- Medical management of heavy menstrual bleeding.Women's health (London, England) · 2016Review
- Management of endometrial modifications in perimenopausal women.Clujul medical (1957) · 2015Review
- 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
- Comparing the effect of mefenamic Acid and vitex agnus on intrauterine device induced bleeding.Journal of caring sciences · 2013Article
- Heavy menstrual flow: current and future trends in management.Reviews in obstetrics & gynecology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExcessively heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) or menorrhagia is an important cause of ill health in women. Eighty per cent of women treated for HMB have no anatomical pathology, which makes medical therapy, with the avoidance of possibly unnecessary surgery, an attractive alternative. Of the wide variety of medications used to reduce heavy menstrual bleeding, oral progestogens are the most commonly prescribed. This review assesses the effectiveness of two different regimens of oral progestogens in reducing ovulatory HMB.
objectivesThe primary objective of this review was to investigate the effectiveness of oral progestogen therapy taken either during the luteal phase or for a longer course of 21 days in achieving a reduction in menstrual blood loss in women of reproductive years with heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched April 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2007) and EMBASE (1985 to April 2007). Attempts were also made to identify trials from citation lists of review articles. In most cases, the first author of each included trial was contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria were randomised comparisons of oral progestogen therapy versus placebo or other medical treatments in women of reproductive years with regular heavy periods measured either objectively or subjectively and with no pathological or iatrogenic causes for their heavy menstrual blood loss. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The review authors extracted the data independently. Odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes were estimated from the data. MAIN
resultsNo RCTs comparing progestogen treatment with placebo were identified. Comparisons between oral progestogens and other medical therapies were assessed separately according to dosage regimen.Progestogen therapy during the luteal phase was significantly less effective at reducing menstrual blood loss when compared with tranexamic acid, danazol and the progesterone-releasing intrauterine system (IUS). Duration of menstruation was significantly longer with the progesterone IUS when compared with oral progestogen therapy but significantly shorter with danazol treatment. Adverse events were significantly more likely with danazol when compared with progestogen treatment. Progestogen therapy from day 5 to day 26 of the menstrual cycle was significantly less effective at reducing menstrual blood loss than the IUS. A significantly higher proportion of norethisterone (NET) patients taking progestogens found their treatment unacceptable compared to IUS patients. However, the adverse effects of breast tenderness and intermenstrual bleeding were more likely in women with the IUS. AUTHORS'
conclusionsProgestogens administered from day 15 or 19 to day 26 of the cycle offer no advantage over other medical therapies such as danazol, tranexamic acid, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and the IUS in the treatment of menorrhagia in women with ovulatory cycles. Progestogen therapy for 21 days of the cycle results in a significant reduction in menstrual blood loss, although women found the treatment less acceptable than intrauterine levonorgestrel. This regimen of progestogen may have a role in the short-term treatment of menorrhagia.
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.