ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Novasure as a mechanical endometrial preparation agent in large uteri.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe evaluated Novasure ablation as a mechanical endometrial preparation agent before Roller Ball endometrial ablation in lieu of GnRH agonists in large uteri.
methodsA retrospective chart review of 20 consecutive patients undergoing Novasure ablation for mechanical endometrial preparation before Roller Ball ablation (RBNovasure group) was conducted and the results compared to that of 23 consecutive patients who received GnRH agonist (Leuprolide acetate) as a medical endometrial preparation before Roller Ball ablation (RB-Lupron group). The postoperative follow-up time frame was divided into immediate (3 mo), intermediate (3 to 12 mo) and long-term (12 to 32 mo). Rates of amenorrhea, heavy bleeding, cramping, and failure (repeat ablation or hysterectomy for heavy bleeding or persistent pain) were compared between the 2 groups.
resultsThe mean rates of amenorrhea for the patients not lost to follow-up at 3 mo, 3 to 12 mo, and 12 to 32 mo visits were 45.5%, 58.8%, and 44.4% for the RB-Lupron group, and 80%, 86.7%, and 100% for the RB-Novasure group (P = .02, P = .08, and P = .02). Failure rates were 4.8%, 6.2%, and 55.6% for the RB-Lupron group; and 0 (0/20), 12.5% (2/16) and 0 (0/8) for the RB-Novasure group (P = .51, P = .50, and P = .02). The RB-Novasure group had a significantly lower rate of heavy bleeding and cramping. 86.4%, 58.8%, and 33.3% patients reported satisfaction with their treatment in the RB-Lupron group and 100%, 87.5%, and 75% in RB-Novasure group (P = .13, P = .07, and P = .11).
conclusionNovasure ablation, for mechanical endometrial preparation before Roller Ball ablation, appears to be a superior alternative to medical preparation with GnRH agonists in patients with large uteri.
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.