SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2014
Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus medical therapy for menorrhagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 5 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- LNG-IUS vs. medical treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Cyclical progestogens for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Levonorgestrel intrauterine system associated amenorrhea: a systematic review and metaanalysis.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2019Pooled it
- Antifibrinolytics for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System (52 mg) for Idiopathic Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2016Pooled it
- Analysis of Non-responders to LNG-IUS in Cases of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2026Article
- Does a Bleeding Disorder Lessen the Efficacy of the 52-mg Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System for Heavy Menstrual Bleeding in Adolescents? A Retrospective Multicenter Study.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2022Article
- Gynecologic and obstetric management of women with von Willebrand disease: summary of 3 systematic reviews of the literature.Blood advances · 2022Article
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding in adolescents with Glanzmann's Thrombasthenia: illustrated case series.BMC women's health · 2018Article
- Medical therapies for heavy menstrual bleeding in women with uterine fibroids: a retrospective analysis of a large commercially insured population in the USA.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2017Article
- Expanding Access to a New, More Affordable Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System in Kenya: Service Delivery Costs Compared With Other Contraceptive Methods and Perspectives of Key Opinion Leaders.Global health, science and practice · 2016Article
- New developments in intrauterine device use: focus on the US.Open access journal of contraception · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) with conventional medical treatment in reducing heavy menstrual bleeding. MATERIAL AND
methodsRelevant studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and clinical trials registries (from inception to April 2014). Randomized controlled trials comparing the LNG-IUS with conventional medical treatment (mefenamic acid, tranexamic acid, norethindrone, medroxyprogesterone acetate injection, or combined oral contraceptive pills) in patients with menorrhagia were included.
resultsEight randomized controlled trials that included 1170 women (LNG-IUS, n=562; conventional medical treatment, n=608) met inclusion criteria. The LNG-IUS was superior to conventional medical treatment in reducing menstrual blood loss (as measured by the alkaline hematin method or estimated by pictorial bleeding assessment chart scores). More women were satisfied with the LNG-IUS than with the use of conventional medical treatment (odds ratio [OR] 5.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.73-9.86). Compared with conventional medical treatment, the LNG-IUS was associated with a lower rate of discontinuation (14.6% vs. 28.9%, OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.74) and fewer treatment failures (9.2% vs. 31.0%, OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.10-0.34). Furthermore, quality of life assessment favored LNG-IUS over conventional medical treatment, although use of various measurements limited our ability to pool the data for more powerful evidence. Serious adverse events were statistically comparable between treatments.
conclusionsThe LNG-IUS was the more effective first choice for management of menorrhagia compared with conventional medical treatment. Long-term, randomized trials are required to further investigate patient-based outcomes and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the LNG-IUS and other medical treatments.
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.