Is LNG-IUS the One-Stop Answer to AUB?

Nayar, Jayashree; Nair, Sobha S.; George, Nisha Annie

doi:10.1007/s13224-017-1050-z

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study presents the most recent information on the relative e cacy of several AUB therapies now available in clinical practice. Having gone through the success story of the LNG-IUS in AUB across a span of approximately four decades, where gynecologists have given evidence-based recommendations all over the world, it is undoubtedly time to examine this device as a onestop remedy to AUB [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System (LNG-IUS)- First Line Treatment of AUB

Kaur¹,

Kaur³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a significant cause of hysterectomy, hence a major health problem. This study was done to evaluate the effectiveness of LNG-IUS in different indications of AUB. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective and observational study conducted at Government Medical College- A Tertiary Care Institute in Northern India over a period of 18 months from January 2019 to June 2020. A total of 40 women in the reproductive age group with AUB having no contraindication for the device, underwent LNG IUS insertion after the consent and followed up at 3,6,9, and 12 months. Results: At 3 months -24 (60%) women had a decrease in mean blood loss (MBL) and16 (40 %) continued with heavy menstrual bleeding(HMB). But most of the women complained of intermenstrual spotting, which needed time-to-time counseling. There was no expulsion and need for removal. At 12 months - 33 women continued with LNG-IUS: 25 women had a decrease in , 7 women achieved amenorrhea and 1 woman persisted with HMB. A total of 32/40 (80%) women were relieved from AUB: [25/40(62.5%) women decrease in MBL, and amenorrhea in 7/40(17.5%]. Only one/40(2.5%) women persisted with HMB, 4/40 (10%)women expelled, 2/40(5%) women got removed from the device as one wanted to conceive, and another had dyspareunia. Only one woman140(2.5%) underwent hysterectomy. The majority 32/40(80.000%) of the patients were satisfied with the treatment. The increase in Hb was less than anticipated. No major side effect was noted. Conclusion:LNG-IUS is an excellent treatment modality for patients of AUB, with good patient satisfaction. It is highly effective in controlling blood loss, well tolerated, with no need for admission, and a better alternative for hysterectomy in the reproductive age group.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System (LNG-IUS)- First Line Treatment of AUB

Kaur¹,

Kaur³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(6) The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) is an effective alternative to heavy menstrual bleeding and has been increasingly used. (1)(2)(3)5,(7)(8)(9)(10)(11) In cases of heavy menstrual bleeding without a structural cause, there was a reduction of 86% after three months and 97% after 12 months. (5,12) In 1999, a kidney transplant patient with multiple fibroids, treated with LNG-IUS due to contraindication to surgery, developed reduced bleeding, and paved the way for a new perspective of clinical treatment in these cases.…”

Section: ❚ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and laparoscopic hysterectomy for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding in enlarged uteri

Depes¹,

Mata²,

Pereira³

et al. 2023

Einstein (São Paulo)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in the treatment of patients with heavy menstrual bleeding and an enlarged uterus and to compare satisfaction and its complications with hysterectomy. Methods: This was a comparative cross-sectional observational study of women with heavy menstrual bleeding and an enlarged uterus. Sixty-two women were treated and followed up for four years. Insertion of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system was performed in Group 1, and laparoscopic hysterectomy was performed in Group 2. Results: In Group 1 (n=31), 21 patients (67.7%) showed improvement in the bleeding pattern, and 11 patients (35.5%) had amenorrhea. Five patients (16.1%) remained with heavy bleeding and were considered to have experienced treatment failure. There were seven expulsions (22.6%); in five patients, bleeding remained heavy, but in two patients the bleeding returned to that of normal menstruation. No relationship was found between treatment failure and greater hysterometries (p=0.40) or greater uterine volumes (p=0.50), whereas expulsion was greater in uteri with smaller hysterometries (p=0.04). There were 13 (21%) complications, seven (53.8%) in the group that underwent insertion of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (all were device expulsions), and six (46.2%) in the surgical group, which were the most severe ones (p=0.76). Regarding satisfaction, 12 patients (38.7%) were dissatisfied with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and one (3.23%) was dissatisfied with the surgical treatment (p=0.00). Conclusion: Treatment with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in patients with heavy menstrual bleeding and an enlarged uterus was effective, and when compared with laparoscopic hysterectomy, it had a lower rate of satisfaction and the same rate of complications, although less severe.

show abstract