Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on December 17, 2004
Human Reproduction 2005 20(3):789-793; doi:10.1093/humrep/deh650
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/3/789    most recent
deh650v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (32)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lockhat, F. B.
Right arrow Articles by Konje, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lockhat, F. B.
Right arrow Articles by Konje, J. C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction Vol. 20 No. 3 © The Author 2004; all rights reserved

The efficacy, side-effects and continuation rates in women with symptomatic endometriosis undergoing treatment with an intra-uterine administered progestogen (levonorgestrel): a 3 year follow-up

Farhana B. Lockhat, Joseph O. Emembolu and Justin C. Konje1

Reproductive Sciences Section, Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine, Robert Kilpatrick Clinical Sciences Building, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester LE2 7LX, UK

To whom correspondence should be addressed.Email: jck4{at}le.ac.uk

BACKGROUND: Side-effects and choice of drugs influence compliance during treatment for endometriosis. Progestogen administered by a device with a 5-year lifespan, has been shown to be an effective medical alternative with several advantages. The aims of this study were to investigate its efficacy, continuation rates and side-effects in women with endometriosis over a 3-year period. METHODS: Thirty-four women with laparoscopically confirmed minimal to moderate symptomatic endometriosis offered insertion of an intrauterine device at diagnostic laparoscopy were followed up at 1, 3 and 6 months, and then every 6 months for 3 years. A symptom diary for side-effects, documentation of symptoms on a visual analogue scale (VAS), a verbal rating scale (VRS) and quantified menstrual loss using the pictorial blood loss chart was used to assess response to treatment. RESULTS: The continuation rates were respectively 85%, 68%, 62% and 56% at, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. Discontinuation rates were highest at <12 months, and most of these were for irregular and intolerable bleeding and persistent pain. An improvement in symptoms was observed throughout the 36 months. The greatest changes in pain assessed by either the VAS or VRS were between the pretreatment scores and those after 12 months (7.7±1.3 versus 3.5±1.8 for VAS, P<0.001; and 25±13.8 versus 14±9.4 for VRS, P<0.002). The monthly quantified blood loss fell from 204 (196) pretreatment to 60 (50) at 12 months (P<0.001) and then to 70 (30) after 36 months. The most common side-effects were bleeding irregularities (14.7%), one-sided abdominal pain (11.8%) and weight gain (8.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Intrauterine progestogen is effective in symptom control throughout the 3 years on the device, and discontinuation is greatest between 3 and 6 months. For those patients with improvement in symptoms, it is an acceptable long-term alternative.

Key words: endometriosis/levonorgestrel/3 year follow-up


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M.K.O. Gomes, J.C. Rosa-e-Silva, S.B. Garcia, A.C. J. de Sa Rosa-e-Silva, A. Turatti, C.S. Vieira, and R.A. Ferriani
Effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on cell proliferation, Fas expression and steroid receptors in endometriosis lesions and normal endometrium
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2009; 24(11): 2736 - 2745.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
P. Vercellini, P. G. Crosignani, E. Somigliana, N. Berlanda, G. Barbara, and L. Fedele
Medical treatment for rectovaginal endometriosis: what is the evidence?
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2009; 24(10): 2504 - 2514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group
Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems
Hum. Reprod. Update, May 1, 2008; 14(3): 197 - 208.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
L. Bahamondes, X. Espejo-Arce, M. M. Hidalgo, C. Hidalgo-Regina, C. Teatin-Juliato, and C. A. Petta
A cross-sectional study of the forearm bone density of long-term users of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1316 - 1319.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
A. Peloggia, C. A. Petta, L. Bahamondes, M. Oliveira-Ribeiro, J. Zhang, and L. Salamonsen
Endometrial chemokines, uterine natural killer cells and mast cells in long-term users of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1129 - 1134.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.