Study Objective
To compare hysterectomy and less invasive alternatives for abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) in 7 clinically important domains
Design
Systematic review
Setting
Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing bleeding, quality of life, pain, sexual health, satisfaction, need for subsequent surgery, and/or adverse events between hysterectomy and less invasive treatment options
Patients
Women with AUB, predominantly from ovulatory disorders and endometrial causes
Interventions
Systematic review of the literature (from inception to January 2011) comparing hysterectomy to alternatives for AUB treatment. Eligible trials were extracted into standardized forms. Trials were graded using a predefined 3-level rating and the strengths of evidence for each outcome were evaluated with the GRADE system.
Measurements and Main Results
Nine RCTs (18 articles) were eligible. Endometrial ablation, levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), and medications were associated with lower risk of adverse events but higher risk of additional treatments treatments than hysterectomy. Compared to ablation, hysterectomy had superior long-term pain and bleeding control. Compared to LNG-IUS, hysterectomy had superior control of bleeding. No other differences between treatments were found.
Conclusion
Less invasive treatment options for AUB result in improvement in quality of life but carry significant risk of retreatment secondary to unsatisfactory results. While hysterectomy is the most effective treatment for AUB, it carries the highest risk for adverse events.