Marwa M Allam, Mohammed S Allam, Mohamed K Mehasseb
{"title":"Recurrent postmenopausal bleeding: a survey of practice among gynecologists in Scotland.","authors":"Marwa M Allam, Mohammed S Allam, Mohamed K Mehasseb","doi":"10.23736/S0026-4784.20.04432-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The definition and management of recurrent postmenopausal bleeding (PMB) are not well described in the literature, with no consensus among the clinicians and no available contemporary UK evidence-based guidelines. We conducted this survey to examine the practice of gynecologists based in Scotland in relation to recurrent postmenopausal bleeding.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A web-based questionnaire was sent to 200 non-training grade gynecologists in Scotland exploring their views on the definition, investigation and management of recurrent PMB. Data were extracted from the 61 responses received.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-seven percent of responders defined recurrent PMB as two or more episodes of PMB, while 21% defined it after three episodes. A bleed-free interval of 3 and 6 months was needed to identify a recurrence by 46% and 44% of responders, respectively. 70% would investigate recurrent PMB with a combination of transvaginal sonography, hysteroscopy and biopsy. Only 19% would arrange a pelvic MRI routinely, while 43% would never offer one. 72% would consider a hysterectomy at some stage, with 22% of responders offering it after 3 episodes of PMB with negative investigation. 18% would never offer a hysterectomy without an identified pathology. 32% of responders felt that the management of recurrent PMB required an individualized case-by-case approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This survey highlights the need for a clinical guideline to address the wide variation in the management of recurrent PMB.</p>","PeriodicalId":18745,"journal":{"name":"Minerva ginecologica","volume":"72 2","pages":"64-69"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva ginecologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4784.20.04432-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The definition and management of recurrent postmenopausal bleeding (PMB) are not well described in the literature, with no consensus among the clinicians and no available contemporary UK evidence-based guidelines. We conducted this survey to examine the practice of gynecologists based in Scotland in relation to recurrent postmenopausal bleeding.
Methods: A web-based questionnaire was sent to 200 non-training grade gynecologists in Scotland exploring their views on the definition, investigation and management of recurrent PMB. Data were extracted from the 61 responses received.
Results: Seventy-seven percent of responders defined recurrent PMB as two or more episodes of PMB, while 21% defined it after three episodes. A bleed-free interval of 3 and 6 months was needed to identify a recurrence by 46% and 44% of responders, respectively. 70% would investigate recurrent PMB with a combination of transvaginal sonography, hysteroscopy and biopsy. Only 19% would arrange a pelvic MRI routinely, while 43% would never offer one. 72% would consider a hysterectomy at some stage, with 22% of responders offering it after 3 episodes of PMB with negative investigation. 18% would never offer a hysterectomy without an identified pathology. 32% of responders felt that the management of recurrent PMB required an individualized case-by-case approach.
Conclusions: This survey highlights the need for a clinical guideline to address the wide variation in the management of recurrent PMB.
期刊介绍:
The journal Minerva Ginecologica publishes scientific papers on obstetrics and gynecology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of editorials, original articles, review articles, case reports, therapeutical notes, special articles and letters to the Editor. Manuscripts are expected to comply with the instructions to authors which conform to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Editors by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org). Articles not conforming to international standards will not be considered for acceptance.