-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Pragmatic Clinical Trial
Outpatient versus inpatient uterine polyp treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding: randomised controlled non-inferiority study.
- Natalie A M Cooper, T Justin Clark, Lee Middleton, Lavanya Diwakar, Paul Smith, Elaine Denny, Tracy Roberts, Lynda Stobert, Susan Jowett, Jane Daniels, and OPT Trial Collaborative Group.
- Women's Health Research Unit, Queen Mary University of London, UK OPT Trial Office, Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Robert Aitken Institute for Clinical Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
- BMJ. 2015 Jan 1;350:h1398.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and acceptability of outpatient polypectomy with inpatient polypectomy.DesignPragmatic multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority study.SettingOutpatient hysteroscopy clinics in 31 UK National Health Service hospitals.Participants507 women who attended as outpatients for diagnostic hysteroscopy because of abnormal uterine bleeding and were found to have uterine polyps.InterventionsParticipants were randomly assigned to either outpatient uterine polypectomy under local anaesthetic or inpatient uterine polypectomy under general anaesthesia. Data were collected on women's self reported bleeding symptoms at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months. Data were also collected on pain and acceptability of the procedure at the time of polypectomy.Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome was successful treatment, determined by the women's assessment of bleeding at six months, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of 25%. Secondary outcomes included generic (EQ-5D) and disease specific (menorrhagia multi-attribute scale) quality of life, and feasibility and acceptability of the procedure.Results73% (166/228) of women in the outpatient group and 80% (168/211) in the inpatient group reported successful treatment at six months (intention to treat relative risk 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.02; per protocol relative risk 0.92, 0.82 to 1.02). Failure to remove polyps was higher (19% v 7%; relative risk 2.5, 1.5 to 4.1) and acceptability of the procedure was lower (83% v 92%; 0.90, 0.84 to 0.97) in the outpatient group Quality of life did not differ significantly between the groups. Four uterine perforations, one of which necessitated bowel resection, all occurred in the inpatient group.ConclusionsOutpatient polypectomy was non-inferior to inpatient polypectomy. Failure to remove a uterine polyp was, however, more likely with outpatient polypectomy and acceptability of the procedure was slightly lower.Trial RegistrationInternational Clinical Trials Registry 65868569.© Cooper et al 2015.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.