Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Advances in endometrial ablation.

Kelly H Roy1, John H Mattox

  • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona 85006, USA. Kelly.Roy@bannerhealth.com

Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey
|December 21, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Surgical Equipment Price Awareness Amongst Obstetrician-Gynecologists.

JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons·2019
Same author

Abnormal Uterine Bleeding Control by Sequential Application of Hysteroscopic Lesion Morcellation and Endometrial Ablation.

The Journal of reproductive medicine·2018
Same author

Randomized comparative trial of cervical block protocols for pain management during hysteroscopic removal of polyps and myomas.

International journal of women's health·2015
Same author

[Application study of human sperm motility bioassay in IVF laboratory quality control].

Zhonghua nan ke xue = National journal of andrology·2006
Same author

Tubal sterilization with a waterborne polyethylene glycol in situ cross-linking material: a minimally invasive approach.

Fertility and sterility·2005
Same author

Partition-controlled progesterone release from waterborne, in situ-gelling materials.

International journal of pharmaceutics·2004
Same journal

Clinical Nuances of Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: A Literature Review.

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
Same journal

A New Perspective on Endometriosis: How Gut and Reproductive Tract Microbiota Influence Disease Progression?

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
Same journal

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Gynecologic Cancers.

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
Same journal

Amniotic Fluid Embolism: A Silent Threat to Maternal Life- An Up-to-Date Comprehensive Review of the Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Outcome.

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
Same journal

A System Review of Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Clinical Management of Intrauterine Adhesions.

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
Same journal

Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter in Pregnancy: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Management.

Obstetrical & gynecological survey·2026
See all related articles

Minimally invasive endometrial ablation devices offer safer alternatives to hysterectomy for dysfunctional uterine bleeding. This review details FDA-approved options, their efficacy, risks, and costs.

Area of Science:

  • Gynecology
  • Minimally Invasive Surgery
  • Medical Device Technology

Background:

  • Surgical treatment for dysfunctional uterine bleeding has evolved from hysterectomy to minimally invasive techniques.
  • Endometrial ablation gained prominence in the mid-1980s and 1990s.
  • Recent advancements include dedicated endometrial ablation devices approved in the U.S.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) evaluation and approval process for endometrial ablation technologies.
  • To compare the reported efficacy of various FDA-approved endometrial ablation devices.
  • To summarize complications, long-term risks, and costs associated with these devices.

Main Methods:

  • Review of FDA approval processes for endometrial ablation devices.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of published data on the efficacy of approved devices.
  • Compilation of reported complications and long-term risks.
  • Presentation of cost data for device disposables and nondisposables.

    • Main Results:

    • The FDA employs rigorous methods to evaluate and approve new endometrial ablation technologies.
    • Various dedicated endometrial ablation devices have demonstrated efficacy in treating dysfunctional uterine bleeding.
    • Complications and potential long-term risks are associated with endometrial ablation, varying by device.
    • Cost analysis includes both disposable and nondisposable components.

    Conclusions:

    • Minimally invasive endometrial ablation devices represent significant advancements in treating dysfunctional uterine bleeding.
    • Understanding device-specific efficacy, risks, and costs is crucial for clinical decision-making.
    • Continued research and post-market surveillance are essential for long-term safety and effectiveness.