ArticleBMC surgery2026
Anchoring levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus suture fixation of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in the treatment of adenomyosis.
Article in BMC surgery, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare two levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system fixation methods for the treatment of adenomyosis.
methodsThe study included patients with adenomyosis who underwent anchoring of the LNG-IUS to the uterine muscle layer using the GyneFix→ intrauterine device (IUD) system and those who underwent LNG-IUS suturing to the uterine muscle layer (experimental and control groups, respectively; n = 21 each), between January 2023 and February 2025. This retrospective study was conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Ningbo University. All 42 patients completed LNG-IUS fixation surgery and followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months post-operatively.
resultsThe pre-treatment clinical profiles, including age, parity, body weight, body mass index (BMI), incidence of dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia, uterine volume, visual analog scale (VAS) score, hemoglobin (Hb) level, and pictorial blood assessment chart (PBAC) score, were not significantly different between the two groups. The mean operative duration was 13.19 ± 2.23 min in the experimental group and 29.48 ± 3.72 min in the control group (p < 0.01). After placement of the LNG-IUS in both groups, the VAS and PBAC scores were significantly reduced, and the Hb levels were significantly increased compared with the baseline (both p < 0.01). At the 6-month follow-up, the uterine volume was also significantly reduced relative to baseline in both groups (p < 0.01). However, there were no significant between-group differences in post-treatment outcomes, including uterine volume, VAS score, Hb level, PBAC score, and LNG-IUS expulsion rate. One patient in the experimental group experienced LNG-IUS expulsion during the first postoperative menstrual period. In the control group, gynecological examination at 3 months postoperatively showed that the LNG-IUS was displaced into the cervical canal and vagina in one patient.
conclusionsBoth LNG-IUS fixation modalities were effective treatments for adenomyosis, and the expulsion and displacement rates were reduced compared to those placed conventionally. LNG-IUS fixation using the GyneFix→ IUD system was performed more rapidly and had a lower risk of water overload.
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.