-
Current Opinion in Obstetrics &... Apr 2020The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of hysterectomy and hysteroscopic endometrial resection in improving...
Hysteroscopic endometrial resection vs. hysterectomy for abnormal uterine bleeding: impact on quality of life and sexuality. Evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of hysterectomy and hysteroscopic endometrial resection in improving quality of life (QoL), sexual function and psychological wellbeing of women abnormal uterine bleeding.
RECENT FINDINGS
We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase for original studies written in English (registered in PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019133632), using the terms 'endometrial ablation', 'endometrial destruction', 'endometrial resection', 'hysterectomy', 'menorrhagia', 'dysfunctional uterine bleeding', 'quality of life', 'sexuality' published up to April 2019. Our literature search produced 159 records. After exclusions, nine studies were included showing the following results: both types of treatment significantly improve QoL and psychological wellbeing; hysterectomy is associated with higher rates of satisfaction; hysterectomy is not associated with a significant deterioration in sexual function.
SUMMARY
Hysterectomy is currently more advantageous in terms of improving abnormal uterine bleeding and satisfaction rates than hysteroscopic endometrial destruction techniques. Furthermore, there is some evidence of a greater improvement in general health for women undergoing hysterectomy. However, high-quality prospective randomized controlled trials should be implemented to investigate the effectiveness of hysterectomy and endometrial ablation in the improvement of QoL outcomes in larger patient cohorts.
Topics: Adult; Endometrial Ablation Techniques; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysteroscopy; Metrorrhagia; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological
PubMed: 31895105
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000609 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in premenopausal women. Although surgery is often used as a treatment, a range of medical therapies...
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in premenopausal women. Although surgery is often used as a treatment, a range of medical therapies are also available. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduce prostaglandin levels, which are elevated in women with excessive menstrual bleeding and also may have a beneficial effect on dysmenorrhoea.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of NSAIDs in achieving a reduction in menstrual blood loss (MBL) in women of reproductive years with HMB.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched, in April 2019, the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialised register, Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online (CENTRAL CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the clinical trial registries and reference lists of articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
The inclusion criteria were randomised comparisons of individual NSAIDs or combined with other medical therapy with each other, placebo or other medical treatments in women with regular heavy periods measured either objectively or subjectively and with no pathological or iatrogenic (treatment-induced) causes for their HMB.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We identified 19 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (759 women) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this review and two review authors independently extracted data. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes from the data of nine trials. We described in data tables the results of the remaining seven cross-over trials with data unsuitable for pooling, one trial with skewed data, and one trial with missing variances. One trial had no data available for analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
As a group, NSAIDs were more effective than placebo at reducing HMB but less effective than tranexamic acid, danazol or the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG IUS). Treatment with danazol caused a shorter duration of menstruation and more adverse events than NSAIDs, but this did not appear to affect the acceptability of treatment, based on trials from 1980 to 1990. However, currently danazol is not a usual or recommended treatment for HMB. There was no clear evidence of difference between NSAIDs and the other treatments (oral luteal progestogen, ethamsylate, an older progesterone-releasing intrauterine system and the oral contraceptive pill (OCP), but most studies were underpowered. There was no evidence of a difference between the individual NSAIDs (naproxen and mefenamic acid) in reducing HMB. The evidence quality ranged from low to moderate, the main limitations being risk of bias and imprecision.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
NSAIDs reduce HMB when compared with placebo, but are less effective than tranexamic acid, danazol or LNG IUS. However, adverse events are more severe with danazol therapy. In the limited number of small studies suitable for evaluation, there was no clear evidence of a difference in efficacy between NSAIDs and other medical treatments such as oral luteal progestogen, ethamsylate, OCP or the older progesterone-releasing intrauterine system.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Menorrhagia; Naproxen; Progesterone; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31535715
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000400.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in women of reproductive age, causing them physical problems, social disruption and reducing their...
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in women of reproductive age, causing them physical problems, social disruption and reducing their quality of life. Medical therapy has traditionally been first-line therapy. Surgical treatment of HMB often follows failed or ineffective medical therapy. The definitive treatment is hysterectomy, but this is a major surgical procedure with significant physical and emotional complications, as well as social and economic costs. Less invasive surgical techniques, such as endometrial resection and ablation, have been developed with the purpose of improving menstrual symptoms by removing or ablating the entire thickness of the endometrium.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effectiveness, acceptability and safety of techniques of endometrial destruction by any means versus hysterectomy by any means for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS
Electronic searches for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) targeted-but were not limited to-the following: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group's specialised register, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the ongoing trial registries. We made attempts to identify trials by examining citation lists of review articles and guidelines and by performing handsearching. Searches were performed in 1999, 2007, 2008, 2013 and on 10 December 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Any RCTs that compared techniques of endometrial resection or ablation (by any means) with hysterectomy (by any technique) for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding in premenopausal women.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed trials for risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified nine RCTs that fulfilled our inclusion criteria for this review. For two trials, the review authors identified multiple publications that assessed different outcomes at different postoperative time points for the same women. No included trials used third generation techniques.Clinical measures of improved bleeding symptoms and satisfaction rates were observed in women who had undergone hysterectomy compared to endometrial ablation. A slightly lower proportion of women who underwent endometrial ablation perceived improvement in bleeding symptoms at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 0.93; 4 studies, 650 women, I² = 31%; low-quality evidence), at two years (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99; 2 studies, 292 women, I² = 53%) and at four years (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.99; 2 studies, 237 women, I² = 79%). Women in the endometrial ablation group also showed improvement in pictorial blood loss assessment chart compared to their baseline (PBAC) score at one year (MD 24.40, 95% CI 16.01 to 32.79; 1 study, 68 women; moderate-quality evidence) and at two years (MD 44.00, 95% CI 36.09 to 51.91; 1 study, 68 women). Repeat surgery resulting from failure of the initial treatment was more likely to be needed after endometrial ablation than after hysterectomy at one year (RR 16.17, 95% CI 5.53 to 47.24; 927 women; 7 studies; I = 0%), at two years (RR 34.06, 95% CI 9.86 to 117.65; 930 women; 6 studies; I = 0%), at three years (RR 22.90, 95% CI 1.42 to 370.26; 172 women; 1 study) and at four years (RR 36.32, 95% CI 5.09 to 259.21;197 women; 1 study). The satisfaction rate was lower amongst those who had endometrial ablation at two years after surgery (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; 4 studies, 567 women, I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), and no evidence of clear difference was reported between post-treatment satisfaction rates in groups at other follow-up times (1 and 4 years).Most adverse events, both major and minor, were more likely after hysterectomy during hospital stay. Women who had an endometrial ablation were less likely to experience sepsis (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.31; participants = 621; studies = 4; I = 62%), blood transfusion (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.59; 791 women; 5 studies; I = 0%), pyrexia (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.35; 605 women; 3 studies; I = 66%), vault haematoma (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.34; 858 women; 5 studies; I = 0%) and wound haematoma (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.53; 202 women; 1 study) before hospital discharge. After discharge from hospital, the only difference that was reported for this group was a higher rate of infection (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.58; 172 women; 1 study).Recovery time was shorter in the endometrial ablation group, considering hospital stay, time to return to normal activities and time to return to work; we did not, however, pool these data owing to high heterogeneity. Some outcomes (such as a woman's perception of bleeding and proportion of women requiring further surgery for HMB), generated a low GRADE score, suggesting that further research in these areas is likely to change the estimates.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Endometrial resection and ablation offers an alternative to hysterectomy as a surgical treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. Both procedures are effective, and satisfaction rates are high. Although hysterectomy offers permanent and immediate relief from heavy menstrual bleeding, it is associated with a longer operating time and recovery period. Hysterectomy also has higher rates of postoperative complications such as sepsis, blood transfusion and haematoma (vault and wound). The initial cost of endometrial destruction is lower than that of hysterectomy but, because retreatment is often necessary, the cost difference narrows over time.
Topics: Endometrial Ablation Techniques; Endometrium; Female; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysteroscopy; Menorrhagia; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31463964
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a menstrual blood loss perceived by women as excessive that affects the health of women of reproductive age, interfering with their...
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a menstrual blood loss perceived by women as excessive that affects the health of women of reproductive age, interfering with their physical, emotional, social and material quality of life. Whilst abnormal menstrual bleeding may be associated with underlying pathology, in the present context, HMB is defined as excessive menstrual bleeding in the absence of other systemic or gynaecological disease. The first-line therapy is usually medical, avoiding possibly unnecessary surgery. Of the wide variety of medications used to reduce HMB, oral progestogens were originally the most commonly prescribed agents. This review assesses the effectiveness of two different types and regimens of oral progestogens in reducing ovulatory HMB.This is the update of a Cochrane review last updated in 2007, and originally named "Effectiveness of cyclical progestagen therapy in reducing heavy menstrual bleeding" (1998).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of oral progestogen therapy taken either during the luteal phase (short cycle) or for a longer course of 21 days per cycle (long cycle), in achieving a reduction in menstrual blood loss in women of reproductive age with HMB.
SEARCH METHODS
In January 2019 we searched Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility's specialized register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycInfo. We also searched trials registers, other sources of unpublished or grey literature and reference lists of retrieved trials. We also checked citation lists of review articles to identify trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments for HMB that included cyclical oral progestogens were eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trials for risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted trial authors for clarification of methods or additional data when necessary. We only assessed adverse events if they were separately measured in the included trials. We compared cyclical oral progestogen in different regimens and placebo or other treatments. Our primary outcomes were menstrual blood loss and satisfaction with treatment; the secondary outcomes were number of days of bleeding, quality of life, compliance and acceptability of treatment, adverse events and costs.
MAIN RESULTS
This review identified 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1071 women in total. Most of the women knew which treatment they were receiving, which may have influenced their judgements about menstrual blood loss and satisfaction. Other aspects of trial quality varied among trials.We did not identify any RCTs comparing progestogen treatment with placebo. We assessed comparisons between oral progestogens and other medical therapies separately according to different regimens.Short-cycle progestogen therapy during the luteal phase (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone for 7 to 10 days, from day 15 to 19) was inferior to other medical therapy, including tranexamic acid, danazol and the progestogen-releasing intrauterine system (Pg-IUS (off of the market since 2001)), releasing 60 mcg of progesterone daily, with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss (mean difference (MD) 37.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 17.67 to 56.91; I = 50%; 6 trials, 145 women). The rate of satisfaction and the quality of life with treatment was similar in both groups. The number of bleeding days was greater on the short cycle progestogen group compared to other medical treatments. Adverse events (such as gastrointestinal symptoms and weight gain) were more likely with danazol when compared with progestogen treatment. We note that danazol is no longer in general use for treating HMB.Long-cycle progestogen therapy (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone), from day 5 to day 26 of the menstrual cycle, is also inferior to the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), releasing tranexamic acid and ormeloxifene, but may be similar to the combined vaginal ring with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss (MD 16.88, 95% CI 10.93 to 22.84; I = 87%; 4 trials, 355 women). A higher proportion of women taking norethisterone found their treatment unacceptable compared to women having Pg-IUS (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40; 1 trial, 40 women). However, the adverse effects of breast tenderness and intermenstrual bleeding were more likely in women with the LNG-IUS. No trials reported on days of bleeding or quality of life for this comparison.The evidence supporting these findings was limited by low or very low gradings of quality; thus, we are uncertain about the findings and there is a potential that they may change if we identify other trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low- or very low-quality evidence suggests that short-course progestogen was inferior to other medical therapy, including tranexamic acid, danazol and the Pg-IUS with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss. Long cycle progestogen therapy (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone) was also inferior to the LNG-IUS, tranexamic acid and ormeloxifene, but may be similar to the combined vaginal ring with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss.
Topics: Danazol; Female; Humans; Intrauterine Devices, Medicated; Medroxyprogesterone Acetate; Menorrhagia; Progesterone; Progestins; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 31425626
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001016.pub3 -
Hematology, Transfusion and Cell Therapy 2019Hemophilia is well known in males, but poorly recognized in hemophilia carriers, who may have a hemorrhagic tendency, and the symptoms may be frequent and severe. Few... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Hemophilia is well known in males, but poorly recognized in hemophilia carriers, who may have a hemorrhagic tendency, and the symptoms may be frequent and severe. Few studies have been done evidencing this bleeding in female carriers of the hemophilia gene.
OBJECTIVES
To verify the prevalence of hemorrhagic symptoms in HC, compared to women in the general population.
MATERIAL AND METHOD
The articles published between October 1996 and November 2016 were searched in the PubMed, Scielo, Lilacs, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central databases.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Seventy-five articles were found in electronic databases and 2 additional articles, through manual search in journal summaries and bibliographical references of other review articles. There is a limitation as to the number of studies that explore the association between the risk of hemorrhagic events and HC A or B. Among the few existing studies, there is a methodological difference, evidenced by control groups with distinct recruitments, divergent questionnaires and non-standardized concepts.
CONCLUSION
This review verified the existence of a higher prevalence of hemorrhagic symptoms in the HC in some outcomes, however, due to the limitations of the few studies found, there is still insufficient evidence to state that the HC has a greater hemorrhagic tendency in relation to the general population.
PubMed: 31412987
DOI: 10.1016/j.htct.2019.02.006 -
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology Feb 2020The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the operative issues and specific dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia outcomes in women who had undergone... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the operative issues and specific dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia outcomes in women who had undergone fertility-sparing surgery, as well as determine the expected outcome for extirpative surgery.
DATA SOURCES
PROSPERO (ID no. 125692). Search was conducted for eligible studies up to March 31, 2019, on MEDLINE/PubMed (1966-2019), Scopus/Elsevier (1950-2019), and Google Scholar (up to 2019). The search terms applied for the search strategy were as follows: adenomyosis, adenomyomas, uterus-sparing surgery, fertility-sparing surgery, pain, dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, uterine volume, adenomyotic volume, case-control studies, cohort studies, and prospective studies.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
A total of 443 studies were initially identified. Exclusion criteria was as follows: (1) inadequate description of preoperative adenomyosis or absence of postoperative histology confirmation of adenomyosis, (2) no statement of use of a standardized instrument for measurement of pain, bleeding, or adenomyotic/uterine volume, (3) follow-up <12 months postoperatively, (4) study population <20 women, and (5) non-English language.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
Nineteen studies with a total of 1843 patients with adenomyosis were included. Twelve studies were further analyzed in the meta-analysis. Complete excision of adenomyosis was associated with improvement in pain, menorrhagia, and reduction of uterine volume by a factor of 6.2, 3.9, and 2.3, respectively; the partial excision of adenomyosis was associated with improvement in pain, menorrhagia, and reduction of uterine volume by a factor of 5.9, 3.0, and 2.9, respectively; the studies with a mixed volume of patients with complete and partial excision of adenomyosis reported improvement in pain, menorrhagia, and reduction of uterine volume by a factor of 4.0, 6.3, and 5.1, respectively.
CONCLUSION
The surgical treatment of adenomyosis results in the satisfactory control of pain and bleeding, as well as in the reduction of uterine volume. Further research is warranted to investigate the long-term control of symptoms to identify any parameters related to the recurrence of adenomyosis, as well as to compare the conservative surgical treatment of adenomyosis with other treatment options.
Topics: Adenomyosis; Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Fertility; Fertility Preservation; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Menorrhagia; Organ Sparing Treatments; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31398415
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.08.004 -
Journal of Complementary & Integrative... Jul 2019Introduction Vitex agnus-castus, also called Vitex, is a plant with many medicinal properties. This systematic study examined the evidence of the effectiveness and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Introduction Vitex agnus-castus, also called Vitex, is a plant with many medicinal properties. This systematic study examined the evidence of the effectiveness and safety of Vitex on menstrual bleeding (primary outcome) and its side effects (secondary outcomes). Materials and methods This systematic review study examined all papers that were a randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental, and cross-over conducted on the effect of Vitex on menstrual bleeding, following the PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) criteria without any time limits in December 2017. The participants were women of reproductive age with no gynecologic disorders. The intervention included the use of Vitex in form of tablets, capsule, or oral drops with different doses. The control group included the placebo or mefenamic acid group. The search strategy in this study was in accordance with MeSH terms. The keywords used separately or in combination with other words were Menstrual bleeding OR Menstruation OR Menorrhagia AND Vitexcastus OR Vitex OR Chasteberry AND randomized controlled trial OR randomized trial OR randomized clinical trial OR randomized controlled. All papers, including Persian or English, were searched for in the databases; Medline (through PubMed), Scopus, Embase (through Ovid), Cochrane Library, Web of Sciences, Google Scholar, SID, Magiran, Irandoc, and Iranmedex, without any time limits. Two authors independently reviewed the quality of the papers and assessed the risk of bias based on Cochrane handbook, and the disputes were resolved through discussion and consensus with a third person. The meta-analysis was done on continuous data (mean of menstrual bleeding). In meta-analysis, subgroup analysis was performed based on the type of comparison group. Results Out of the 8,905 searched papers in the databases, 8,905 titles, 720 abstracts, 85 full texts, and 20 references of the papers were reviewed, of which 5 papers entered this study. Based on the subgroup analysis, the consumption of Vitex did not have a significant effect on the amount of menstrual bleeding compared to the placebo group in the first (mean difference [MD]: 3.08; 95% CI: -3.11-9.26; p=0.33; I2=0%) and second menstrual cycles (MD: 0.00; 95% CI: -5.75-5.75; p=1.00; I2=0%). Also, the Higham mean score was statistically more in the Vitex group compared to the mefenamic acid group in the first menstrual cycle (MD: 7.17; 95% CI: 0.33-14.01; p=0.04; I2=0%) but there was no statistical significant difference between Vitex and mefenamic acid groups in the second menstrual cycle (MD: 12.18; 95% CI: -5.57-29.94; p=0.18; I2=75%). Only nausea and abdominal pain were reported as side effects of Vitex in the included studies. Conclusions The results of this study showed that the consumption of Vitex in the intervention group did not have a significant effect on menstrual bleeding in comparison with the placebo group. However, due to the relatively low quality of the papers, it is essential to perform clinical trials with an appropriate design to determine the effect of Vitex on menstrual bleeding.
Topics: Female; Humans; Menstruation; Plant Preparations; Plants, Medicinal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitex
PubMed: 31369395
DOI: 10.1515/jcim-2018-0053 -
International Journal of Gynaecology... Aug 2019Uterine fibroids cause menorrhagia and adversely affect quality of life. Ulipristal acetate (UPA) can improve fibroid symptoms. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Uterine fibroids cause menorrhagia and adversely affect quality of life. Ulipristal acetate (UPA) can improve fibroid symptoms.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of UPA in women with symptomatic uterine fibroids.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINHAL on December 31, 2018, using relevant search terms. Clinical trials registries were searched for ongoing trials and there were no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing UPA with placebo/no treatment/any pharmacological intervention for symptomatic uterine fibroids.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in included studies. We used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, plus their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
We identified six RCTs (1121 participants). Five studies (882 participants) compared UPA with placebo. UPA significantly achieved amenorrhea (RR 24.54; 95% CI, 10.82-55.64), reduced blood loss, and improved quality of life with insufficient evidence from RCTs for adverse events. There was insufficient evidence for improved outcomes when UPA was compared with leuprolide acetate.
CONCLUSION
Compared with placebo, oral UPA significantly induces amenorrhea, reduces heavy menses, and improves quality-of-life in women with uterine fibroids.
Topics: Adult; Amenorrhea; Female; Humans; Leiomyoma; Menorrhagia; Norpregnadienes; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Neoplasms
PubMed: 31127621
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12868