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.