Observational studyArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Retrospective study on the outcomes and satisfaction with endometrial ablation by bipolar energy (NovaSure
Observational study in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the effectiveness, safety, and participant satisfaction with endometrial ablation by bipolar energy (NovaSure
methodsMulticenter retrospective observational study based on medical record review of the outcomes related to endometrial ablation by the bipolar-energy technique procedure to treat HMB in the setting of three university teaching hospitals in Spain.
resultsA total of 333 women were included in the study. Most bipolar-energy ablations were successful (85.12%; n = 269 out of 316), with amenorrhea the most frequent outcome (39.6%, n = 131 out of 316). The majority of participants had no complications (95.5%; n = 317 out of 332), and of those who did, only 2.1% were related to the technique. No further treatment was required for HMB in 82.8% of women (n = 274 out of 331), and surgery was avoided in 91.8%; only 5.9% of women underwent ablation-related hysterectomy. In women with previous transverse cesarean sections (CS), 91.0% avoided subsequent surgical treatment. Eighty-six percent of women (n = 221 out of 257) were satisfied with the procedure.
conclusionBipolar-energy ablation is very effective and safe for the treatment of HMB and yielded a high rate of participant satisfaction in our setting. The presence of comorbidities or previous CS may slightly reduce the effectiveness of the method, while performing concomitant surgery (mainly curettage) increases the rate of complications. Notably, despite the known increased risk of hysterectomy, most participants with previous CSs who underwent ablation avoided major surgery.
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.