4.7 Article

A randomized, controlled clinical trial comparing the effects of aromatase inhibitor (letrozole) and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (triptorelin) on uterine leiomyoma volume and hormonal status

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 93, Issue 1, Pages 192-198

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.064

Keywords

Uterus; myoma; medical therapy; aromatose inhibitor; GnRha

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine and compare the efficacy and safety of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) vs. aromatase inhibitor in premenopausal women with leiomyomas. Design: Multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Setting: University hospitals. Patient(s): A total of 70 subjects with a single uterine myoma measuring 5 cm. Subjects were randomized into two groups with use of a random table. They were treated with aromatase inhibitor (group A) or GnRHa (group B). Intervention(s): Group A received letrozole (2.5 mg/d) for 12 weeks. Group B received triptorelin (3.75 mg/mo) for 12 weeks. Main Outcome Measure(s): Measurement of myoma volume and E-2, FSH, LH, and T levels. Result(S): Total myoma volume decreased by 45.6% in group A and 33.2% in group B. Reductions in myoma volume in the two groups were statistically significant. There was no significant change in hormonal milieu in group A. The serum level of hormones significantly decreased in group B by the 12th week of treatment. Conclusion(s): Uterine myoma volume was successfully reduced by use of an aromatase inhibitor. Rapid onset of action and avoidance of initial gonadotropin flare with an aromatase inhibitor may be advantageous for short-term management of women with myomas of any size who are to be managed transiently and who wish to avoid surgical intervention, specifically women with unexplained infertility having uterine myoma. (Fertil Steril(R) 2010;93:192-8. (C)2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available