Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding

  1. Rosalie J Fergusson1,
  2. Anne Lethaby2,*,
  3. Sasha Shepperd3,
  4. Cindy Farquhar4

Editorial Group: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group

Published Online: 29 NOV 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 30 OCT 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub2


How to Cite

Fergusson RJ, Lethaby A, Shepperd S, Farquhar C. Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD000329. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Auckland District Health Board, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

  2. 2

    University of Auckland, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Auckland, New Zealand

  3. 3

    University of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK

  4. 4

    University of Auckland, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Auckland, New Zealand

*Anne Lethaby, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand. a.lethaby@auckland.ac.nz.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 29 NOV 2013

SEARCH

  1. You have free access to this content

    Current Version

    Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding

    Rosalie J Fergusson, Anne Lethaby, Sasha Shepperd and Cindy Farquhar

    Version of Record online: 29 NOV 2013 | DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub2

Previous versions of this article and their online publication dates

  1. Version 1

    Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding

    Anne Lethaby, Sasha Shepperd, Cindy Farquhar and Inez Cooke

    Version of Record online: 26 APR 1999 | DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329