4.6 Editorial Material

Evaluation and Management of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding

Journal

MAYO CLINIC PROCEEDINGS
Volume 94, Issue 2, Pages 326-335

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2018.12.012

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common condition that leads to increased health care costs and decreased quality of life. A systematic approach to AUB evaluation can simplify management and enhance women's well-being. Abnormal uterine bleeding describes any variation from normal bleeding patterns in nonpregnant, reproductive-aged women beyond menarche lasting for at least 6 months. Ambiguous and inconsistent use of terminology and definitions to characterize AUB in the past decades necessitated a new, consensus-based approach to nomenclature and AUB evaluation. This led to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) System 1 in 2007, which standardized nomenclature, set parameters, and defined normal and abnormal bleeding based on the 5th to 95th percentile data from available large-scale epidemiologic studies. FIGO System 1, endorsed by several national and international societies, improved worldwide communication among educators, clinicians, and researchers. FIGO System 2, published in 2011, focused on classifications of AUB etiology into structural and nonstructural entities using the PALM-COEIN (polyp[s], adenomyosis, leiomyoma, malignancy, coagulopathy, ovulatory dysfunction, endometrial disorders, iatrogenic, and not yet classified) classification system. The PALM-COEIN classification is facilitated by a complete patient history combined with appropriate imaging, histopathologic analysis, or laboratory evaluation to ensure accurate diagnostic and treatment approaches to AUB. Herein we present the systematic evaluation of AUB. (C) 2018 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available