Long-term economic evaluation of resectoscopic endometrial ablation versus hysterectomy for the treatment of menorrhagia

D A Hidlebaugh, Dennis Hidlebaugh, Hidlebaugh DA, Orr RK, Richard K. Orr, R K Orr
The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists · 1998 · vol. 5(4) , pp. 351–356 · doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(98)80046-7 · PMID:9782137 · W2072277153
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 2 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-09 ⓘ

This study compares the long-term economic impact of resectoscopic endometrial ablation against hysterectomy for treating menorrhagia.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Study objectiveTo assess long-term costs of resectoscopic endometrial ablation versus hysterectomy in women with menorrhagia.DesignControlled cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).SettingMultispeciality group practice.PatientsSixty-four women who underwent endometrial ablation during 1992-1994 and 46 women who underwent hysterectomy during 1990-1992. To attain comparable controls, patients with uterine size exceeding 14 weeks or uterine weight greater than 300 g, ovarian pathology, endometriosis, or neoplasia were excluded.InterventionsEndometrial ablation and hysterectomy, followed by economic evaluation.Measurements and main resultsDirect costs were hospitalization charges, professional fees, preoperative depot leuprolide, and gynecologic care during 3 years after primary surgery. Indirect costs were calculated based on known demographic data, recovery time, and lost productivity. Surgical outcomes, complications, repeat surgeries, menstrual outcomes, and overall patient satisfaction were assessed. Operating time (38 vs 107 min), hospital stay (0.7 vs 2.7 days), frequency of postoperative complications (6.3% vs 21.7%), and recuperation time (5 vs 32 days) were less with endometrial ablation than with hysterectomy. Mean follow-up was 48.5 months (range 36-68 mo), with rates of amenorrhea, hypomenorrhea, and eumenorrhea of 49%, 29%, and 8%, respectively. One patient was lost to follow-up. There were eight failures (12%): repeat endometrial ablations (2 women), abdominal hysterectomy (1), and laparoscopic-assisted hysterectomy (5). Most women (85%) remained satisfied with the operation. Total direct costs/case for endometrial ablation were $5434 versus $8417 for hysterectomy; respective indirect costs/case were $525 and $3360. Conclusion. Long-term direct and indirect costs of endometrial ablation were significantly less than those of hysterectomy ($5959 vs $11,777) for the treatment of menorrhagia.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

MeSH descriptors

Catheter Ablation Hysterectomy Hysteroscopy Menorrhagia Adult Catheter Ablation Catheter Ablation Cohort Studies Costs and Cost Analysis Female Humans Hysterectomy Hysteroscopy Menorrhagia Middle Aged Treatment Outcome

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (29)

Cited by (2)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-07-29T06:27:48.050232+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:10:35.327253+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-06-02T02:00:03.124865+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK