Clinical Trials Logo

Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding clinical trials

View clinical trials related to Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding.

Filter by:
  • Terminated  
  • Page 1

NCT ID: NCT01776203 Terminated - Clinical trials for Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding

Study of a Progestin to Prevent Bleeding Associated With Initiation of Medical Menopause With GnRH Agonist

Start date: January 2012
Phase: Phase 4
Study type: Interventional

In this study, the investigators would like to see if giving medroxyprogesterone acetate for 3 weeks after Leuprolide acetate injection will help to decrease this amount of bleeding, decrease the amount of nausea, bloating and cramping and increase patient satisfaction

NCT ID: NCT01581905 Terminated - Endometriosis Clinical Trials

Study of Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy at a Teaching Institution

Start date: March 2012
Phase: N/A
Study type: Interventional

Approximately 600,000 women undergo hysterectomy each year in the United States, of which 12% are laparoscopic. The most common indications for hysterectomy are: symptomatic uterine leiomyomas (40.7%), endometriosis (17.7%), and prolapse (14.5%). The first total laparoscopic hysterectomy was performed by Reich et al in 1988. Many studies have proven that laparoscopic hysterectomy is associated with lower preoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and shorter recovery times than abdominal hysterectomy. The literature has also shown the complication rates for laparoscopic cases are similar to open procedures in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice state that laparoscopic hysterectomy is an alternative to abdominal hysterectomy for those patients in whom vaginal hysterectomy is not indicated or feasible. The ACOG Committee on Gynecologic Practice site multiple advantages of laparoscopic hysterectomy to abdominal hysterectomy including faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer abdominal wall/wound infections. Despite the recommendations of ACOG for a more minimally invasive approach, 66% of all hysterectomies are performed abdominally. Key reasons for the lag in utilization of laparoscopic techniques are the technical obstacles of performing minimally invasive hysterectomies. Robotic technology has emerged as a means to decrease the learning curve and increase the availability of minimally invasive surgery to patients. A current review of the literature reveals no randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy vs. robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. The investigator's aim is to address this void. The primary objective of this study is to determine whether Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy is equivalent to Conventional Laparoscopic Hysterectomy with respect to operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. The investigator's secondary objective was to assess the cost, morbidity, and mortality of each procedure.