Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 11:40 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-01-03 @ 9:37 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT02894151
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2016-09-09
First Post:
2016-08-31
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Effectiveness of Levonorgestrel-intrauterine System (LNG-IUS) Versus Depot Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (DMPA) in Treatment of Pelvic Pain in Clinically Diagnosed Endometriotic Patients
Sponsor:
Chulalongkorn University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
None
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2016-09
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
The primary objective : To compare effectiveness of pain control in endometriosis associated pelvic pain between LNG-IUS and DMPA The secondary objective : To compare vaginal bleeding pattern, side effect, continuation rate, satisfaction and quality of life between LNG-IUS and DMPA in treatment of endometriosis associated pelvic pain
Detailed Description:
The participants were randomized into two treatment groups, by Block Of Four method, LNG-IUS and DMPA group. For the patients in the LNG-IUS group, a LNG-IUS (Mirena) was inserted. The system released the active ingredient LNG for up to five years at a virtually constant rate. For the patients in the Depot MPA Group, 150 mg depot MPA was given intramuscularly once every three months.
All participants were recieved the individual calendars to record all vaginal bleeding occured during treatment. The amount of bleeding was described relative to normal menstruation of each patient; less than, same as, more than their baseline menses. To use easily, we assigned the symbols to represent quantity of vaginal bleeding as described. Each symbol was recorded every day except no bleeding, which was represented with blank space in the calendar. The bleeding pattern were assessed as bleeding rating score; less than normal menses = 1, same amount of normal menses = 2, more than normal menses = 3. No bleeding was defined as 30 consecutive days with bleeding score 0. The mean bleeding score was calculated by sum of the daily scores in each month period.
Follow-up visits were scheduled three times at months 1, 3 and 6 after initial treatment. At each visit, VAS and bleeding pattern was recorded. Side-effects of the two therapies were checked. Patients were allowed to choose to withdraw from their designated therapy at any time. The follow-up was completed in May 2016 for the last patient.
At the final visit, 6 months after treatment, all participants in both treatment groups were recorded the datas of blood pressure, body weight, transvaginal ultrasonography, lipid profiles and SF-36 quesionaires. In addition, all50 patients were asked whether they want to continue in the given treatement and the reason of discontinuation including the satisfaction scores during therapy were rated as 1-5 Likert-scale; 1-very dissatisfied, 2- dissatisfied, 3-neither satisfied/dissatisfied, 4-satisfied, 5-very satified.
All participants were recieved the individual calendars to record all vaginal bleeding occured during treatment. The amount of bleeding was described relative to normal menstruation of each patient; less than, same as, more than their baseline menses. To use easily, we assigned the symbols to represent quantity of vaginal bleeding as described. Each symbol was recorded every day except no bleeding, which was represented with blank space in the calendar. The bleeding pattern were assessed as bleeding rating score; less than normal menses = 1, same amount of normal menses = 2, more than normal menses = 3. No bleeding was defined as 30 consecutive days with bleeding score 0. The mean bleeding score was calculated by sum of the daily scores in each month period.
Follow-up visits were scheduled three times at months 1, 3 and 6 after initial treatment. At each visit, VAS and bleeding pattern was recorded. Side-effects of the two therapies were checked. Patients were allowed to choose to withdraw from their designated therapy at any time. The follow-up was completed in May 2016 for the last patient.
At the final visit, 6 months after treatment, all participants in both treatment groups were recorded the datas of blood pressure, body weight, transvaginal ultrasonography, lipid profiles and SF-36 quesionaires. In addition, all50 patients were asked whether they want to continue in the given treatement and the reason of discontinuation including the satisfaction scores during therapy were rated as 1-5 Likert-scale; 1-very dissatisfied, 2- dissatisfied, 3-neither satisfied/dissatisfied, 4-satisfied, 5-very satified.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: