McMasterLogo_New-2017-300x165
Back
Clinician Article

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system vs oral progestins for non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized trials.



  • Abu Hashim H
  • Ghayaty E
  • El Rakhawy M
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Oct;213(4):469-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.03.037. Epub 2015 Mar 19. (Review)
PMID: 25797236
Read abstract Read evidence summary
Disciplines
  • Gynecology
    Relevance - 7/7
    Newsworthiness - 5/7
  • Oncology - Gynecology
    Relevance - 6/7
    Newsworthiness - 5/7

Abstract

We sought to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) with oral progestins for treatment of non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia (EH). Searches were conducted on PubMed, SCOPUS, and CENTRAL databases to August 2014, and reference lists of relevant articles were screened. The search was limited to articles conducted on human beings and females. The PRISMA Statement was followed. Seven randomized controlled trials (n = 766 women) were included. Main outcome measures were the therapeutic effect rate (histological response) after 3, 6, 12, and 24 months of treatment; rate of irregular vaginal bleeding; and the hysterectomy rate per woman randomized. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used for quality assessment. Metaanalysis was performed with fixed effects model. LNG-IUS achieved a highly significant therapeutic response rate compared with oral progestins after 3 months of treatment (odds ratio [OR], 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-3.82; P = .001, 5 trials, I(2) = 0%, n = 376), after 6 months of treatment (OR, 3.16; 95% CI, 1.84-5.45; P < .00001, 4 trials, I(2) = 0%, n = 397), after 12 months of treatment (OR, 5.73; 95% CI, 2.67-12.33; P < .00001, 2 trials, I(2) = 0%, n = 224), and after 24 months of treatment (OR, 7.46; 95% CI, 2.55-21.78; P = .0002, 1 trial, n = 104). Subgroup analysis showed evidence of highly significant therapeutic response following LNG-IUS compared with oral progestins for non-atypical simple as well as complex EH (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.14-5.53; P = .02, 6 trials, I(2) = 0%, n = 290; and OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 1.62-6.74; P = .001, 4 trials, I(2) = 0%, n = 216, respectively). Compared with oral progestins, LNG-IUS achieved significantly fewer hysterectomies (OR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.45; P < .00001, 3 trials, n = 362, I² = 42%). No difference was observed in the rate of irregular vaginal bleeding between both groups (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.54-2.32; P = .76, 2 trials, n = 207, I² = 77%). Funnel plot analysis was not performed because of the relatively small number of included studies. For treatment of non-atypical EH, LNG-IUS achieves higher therapeutic effect rates and lower hysterectomy rates than oral progestins and should be offered as an alternative to oral progestins in these cases.


Clinical Comments

Gynecology

Using IUS instead of oral progesterone is usual current practice where I work, but this may provide more reliable evidence to support this.

Gynecology

The LNG IUS seems to be the drug of choice before hysterectomy in patients with EH. Quite expectedly, the performance of the LNG IUS improved over time compared with oral progestins.

Register for free access to all Professional content

Register