Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) or abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common cause of gynecological complaints in perimenopausal women. The treatment chosen by most of the women having HMB/AUB in the perimenopausal age group when medical therapy fails is hysterectomy, which unfortunately has significant issues related to safety and long-term quality of life apart from being a burden on the health care system and cost to patients. Minimal access surgical techniques like hysteroscopic targeted therapies are available which are conservative and spare the uterus and major surgery and its complications and sequelae. Hysteroscopic management of HMB is a minimally invasive and targeted approach in diagnosing and treating the pathological lesions causing the symptoms and not radical like hysterectomy which has more chances of occurrence of adverse events both intra and postoperatively. In terms of health-related quality of life, women suffering from HMB who underwent a hysteroscopic conservative approach had better scores when compared to those with hysterectomy. The present review aims to review the evidence generated to compare the two surgical modalities, hysteroscopic targeted therapy and hysterectomy, in terms of their effectiveness, safety, and effect on the quality of life of these perimenopausal women having HMB/AUB.
Keywords: aub; hmb; hysterectomy; hysteroscopy; quality of life (qol); review article.
Copyright © 2023, Acharya et al.