Randomized comparison of vaporizing electrode and cutting loop for endometrial ablation

Paolo Vercellini, Sabina Oldani, Lara Yaylayan, Barbara Zaina, Olga De Giorgi, Pier Giorgio Crosignani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Objective: To compare endometrial ablation using a vaporizing electrode with resection using a standard cutting loop, evaluating distension fluid absorption, operating time, and ease of procedure. Methods: Premenopausal menorrhagic women with normal hysteroscopic and endometrial biopsy findings were allocated randomly to endometrial vaporization (n = 47) or resection (n = 44). Distension medium deficit, operating time, and degree of difficulty of the procedure were determined at surgery. Menstrual pattern of women in both groups was also assessed after 1-year follow-up. Results: Mean ± standard deviation (SD) distension fluid deficit was 109 ± 126 mL in the vaporization and 367 ± 257 mL in the resection group (mean difference 258 mL; 95% confidence interval 175, 341 mL; P <.001, unpaired t test). Mean ± SD operating time was, respectively, 9.2 ± 3.1 minutes versus 10.7 ± 2.5 minutes. The surgeon classified intraoperative difficulties as none in 32, minimal in 11, moderate in four, and severe in none in the vaporization group, and 17, 14, seven, and six in the resection group. Menstrual pattern at 1 year in the former group was amenorrhea in 17 (36%) cases, hypomenorrhea or spotting in 20 (43%), normal flows in 10 (21%), and menorrhagia in none compared with, respectively, 21 (48%), 14 (32%), seven (16%), and two (5%) in the latter group. Conclusion: Endometrial ablation with the vaporizing electrode limited fluid absorption compared with resection by the standard cutting loop. Long-term effects on uterine bleeding were similar.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)521-527
Number of pages7
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1999

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology


Dive into the research topics of 'Randomized comparison of vaporizing electrode and cutting loop for endometrial ablation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this