OBJECTIVE: To describe the three-step hysteroscopic endometrial ablation (EA) technique without endometrial preparation, and its long-term outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Four hundred and thirty-eight premenopausal women with menorrhagia or menometrorrhagia underwent three-step hysteroscopic EA, which consists of rollerball ablation of the fundus and cornual regions, a cutting loop endomyometrial resection of the rest of the cavity, and rollerball redessication of the whole pre-ablated uterine cavity. The main outcome measures were menstrual status, level of satisfaction with the procedure, and the need for repeat ablation or hysterectomy. Questionnaires were completed for 385 women (87.9%) with a mean follow-up of 48.2 months. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four responders (47.8%) reported amenorrhea; 177 (46%) had light to normal flow. One patient (0.3%) underwent repeat ablation and 20 (5.2%) underwent hysterectomy: 15 (3.9%) because of endometrial ablation failure and 5 (1.3%) because of indications unrelated to the ablation (three cases of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and two cases of fibroids). Two hundred and ninety-two patients (75.8%) were very satisfied, and 78 (20.3%) satisfied with the results. No major complications occurred and three women (0.8%) became pregnant during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: EA is safe and effective means of treating of menorrhagia and menometrorrhagia in premenopausal women, and helps avoid hysterectomy in 95% of patients suffering from heavy bleeding, with or without uterine fibroids. Women should be informed that the procedure is not contraceptive and that pregnancy is possible after treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the three-step hysteroscopic endometrial ablation (EA) technique without endometrial preparation, and its long-term outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Four hundred and thirty-eight premenopausal women with menorrhagia or menometrorrhagia underwent three-step hysteroscopic EA, which consists of rollerball ablation of the fundus and cornual regions, a cutting loop endomyometrial resection of the rest of the cavity, and rollerball redessication of the whole pre-ablated uterine cavity. The main outcome measures were menstrual status, level of satisfaction with the procedure, and the need for repeat ablation or hysterectomy. Questionnaires were completed for 385 women (87.9%) with a mean follow-up of 48.2 months. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-four responders (47.8%) reported amenorrhea; 177 (46%) had light to normal flow. One patient (0.3%) underwent repeat ablation and 20 (5.2%) underwent hysterectomy: 15 (3.9%) because of endometrial ablation failure and 5 (1.3%) because of indications unrelated to the ablation (three cases of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and two cases of fibroids). Two hundred and ninety-two patients (75.8%) were very satisfied, and 78 (20.3%) satisfied with the results. No major complications occurred and three women (0.8%) became pregnant during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: EA is safe and effective means of treating of menorrhagia and menometrorrhagia in premenopausal women, and helps avoid hysterectomy in 95% of patients suffering from heavy bleeding, with or without uterine fibroids. Women should be informed that the procedure is not contraceptive and that pregnancy is possible after treatment.