|
|
||||||||
ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
From the Departments of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Radiology, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California; Department of Radiology, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan; Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri; Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; Stanford University, Palo Alto, California; Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, California; and University of Koln, Koln, Germany.
Address reprint requests to: Michael S. Broder, MD, UCLA School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Box 951740, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1740; E-mail: mbroder{at}ucla.edu.
OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term outcomes of uterine artery embolization and abdominal myomectomy in patients with symptomatic uterine myomas.
METHODS: At a single institution in an 18-month time, 59 patients had bilateral uterine artery embolization and 38 patients had abdominal myomectomy to treat symptomatic uterine myomas. We reviewed medical records and surveyed patients 3 or more years after their procedures to assess how many needed further surgical procedures in the intervening years, to what extent symptoms remained improved, and how satisfied the patients were with the long term results of the index procedure.
RESULTS: Follow-up was available on 51 embolization and 30 myomectomy patients and ranged from 37 to 59 months. Patients who had embolization were older (44 versus 38 years, P < .001) and more likely to have had previous surgical procedures (P < .001) than those who had myomectomy. Taking into account the variable follow-up period, embolization patients were more likely to have had further invasive treatment for myomas (29% versus 3%) (P = .004). Among women not needing further surgery, overall symptoms improved in 92% (33/36) of embolization and 90% (26/29) of myomectomy patients (P = .78). Ninety-four percent (34/36) of embolization patients and 79% (23/29) of myomectomy patients were at least somewhat satisfied with their choice of procedure (P = .06).
CONCLUSION: Women who had embolization were more likely than those who had myomectomy to need further invasive treatment (surgery or repeat embolization) in the 35 years after the index procedure. Among women who did not need such treatment, satisfaction and relief of symptoms were similar. Large, randomized trials are needed to more accurately compare these two procedures.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
G. Tropeano, S. Amoroso, and G. Scambia Non-surgical management of uterine fibroids Hum. Reprod. Update, May 1, 2008; 14(3): 259 - 274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Scheurig, A. Gauruder-Burmester, C. Kluner, R. Kurzeja, A. Lembcke, E. Zimmermann, B. Hamm, and T. Kroencke Uterine artery embolization for symptomatic fibroids: short-term versus mid-term changes in disease-specific symptoms, quality of life and magnetic resonance imaging results Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2006; 21(12): 3270 - 3277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. T. Sharp Assessment of new technology in the treatment of idiopathic menorrhagia and uterine leiomyomata. Obstet. Gynecol., October 1, 2006; 108(4): 990 - 1003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Spies Adding to our understanding of uterine fibroid embolization. Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2006; 186(3): 846 - 847. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Katsumori, T. Kasahara, and K. Akazawa Long-term outcomes of uterine artery embolization using gelatin sponge particles alone for symptomatic fibroids. Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2006; 186(3): 848 - 854. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Spies, J. Bruno, F. Czeyda-Pommersheim, S. T. Magee, S. A. Ascher, and R. C. Jha Long-Term Outcome of Uterine Artery Embolization of Leiomyomata Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 2005; 106(5): 933 - 939. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Is Embolization As Effective As Myomectomy for Treating Uterine Myomas? Journal Watch Women's Health, December 4, 2002; 2002(1204): 4 - 4. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
E. R. Myers Uterine Artery Embolization: What More Do We Need to Know? Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 2002; 100(5): 847 - 848. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |