Review Endometrial safety of hormone replacement therapy: review of literature

Unopposed estrogens for treating menopausal symptoms were extensively used when epidemiological findings associated them with an increased endometrial cancer risk. Adding progestogens reverse this side effect efficiently but patient, dose, type and especially time during which the progestogen is administered are important. Long-term uterine safety of the long cycle HRT with administration of the progestogen every 3 months remains unclear. Because regular bleeding lowers compliance, continuous combined estrogen–progestogen treatment has become popular. Many different regimens are now available using oral, transdermal, subcutaneous, intravaginal or intra-uterine application of the estrogen and/or progestogen. Available but inadequate studies seem to point towards a slightly decreased endometrial cancer risk with continuous combined preparations compared with non-HRT-users and an increased risk with long-term oral but not vaginal treatment with low-potency estrogen formulations such as estriol. Newer compounds for menopausal health such as tibolone and raloxifene seem to be safe. As for any women with abnormal vaginal bleeding, those on HRT must have an intra-uterine evaluation. Transvaginal ultrasound (TVU) is very accurate in predicting a normal uterine cavity but inaccurate in predicting endometrial pathology because of a low specificity and positive predictive value of a thick echogenic endometrium. In all such cases a three-dimensional visualisation of intra-uterine lesions is more accurate. Periodic examination with TVU and/or endometrial biopsy of HRT exposed endometrium in asymptomatic women is not cost-effective. The available limited data on the use of HRT in hysterectomised women for early stage endometrial cancer show little evidence in terms of recurrence