Conclusions
In conclusion, our data showed
that LNG-IUS achieved higher 16-week CR rate than oral MA treatment.
LNG-IUS had the fewest adverse events compared with MA or MA+LNG-IUS.
MA+LNG-IUS did not achieve higher treatment effect compared with MA or
LNG-IUS alone. Our data support
the usage of LNG-IUS as first line choice for fertility sparing
treatment in AEH patients with proper uterine cavity size. Phase III
clinical trials including a sufficient number of patients are needed to
further validate the efficacy of LNG-IUS in AEH patients.