| Literature DB >> 19777299 |
Gianpaolo Carrafiello1, Chiara Recaldini, Federico Fontana, Fabio Ghezzi, Salvatore Cuffari, Domenico Laganà, Carlo Fugazzola.
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that radiofrequency thermal ablation (RFA) of uterine fibroids through a percutaneous ultrasound (US)-guided procedure is an effective and safe minimally invasive treatment, with encouraging short-term results. The aim of this study was to assess the results in terms of volume reduction and clinical symptoms improvement in the midterm follow-up of fibroids with a diameter of up to 8 cm. Eleven premenopausal females affected by symptomatic fibroids underwent percutaneous US-guided RFA. Symptom severity and reduction in volume were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The mean symptom score (SSS) before the procedure was 50.30 (range 31.8-67.30), and the average quality of life (QOL) score value was 62 (range 37.20-86.00). The mean basal diameter was 5.5 cm (range 4.4-8) and the mean volume was 101.5 cm(3) (range 44.58-278 cm(3)). The mean follow-up was 9 months (range 3-12 months). The mean SSS value at the end of the follow-up was 13.38 (range 0-67.1) and the QOL 90.4 (range 43.8-100). At follow-up the mean diameter was 3.0 cm (range 1.20-4.5 cm), and the mean volume was 18 cm(3) (range 0.90-47.6 cm(3)). In 10 of 11 patients we obtained total or partial regression of symptoms. In one case the clinical manifestations persisted and it was thus considered unsuccessful. In conclusion, US-guided percutaneous RFA is a safe and effective treatment even for fibroids up to 8 cm.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19777299 PMCID: PMC2816798 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-009-9707-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol ISSN: 0174-1551 Impact factor: 2.740
Age, mean diameter and volume reduction, and changes in SSS and QOL in 11 patients
| Patient ID and age | Parameter | Time (month) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 12 | ||
| (A) 42 | Diameter (cm) | 5 | 4.20 | 3.10 | 2.20 | 2.00 | 2.00 |
| Volume (cm3) | 65.42 | 38.77 | 15.59 | 5.57 | 4.19 | 4.19 | |
| SSS | 44.20 | – | 20.20 | 6.10 | 2.00 | 00 | |
| QOL | 66.20 | – | 84.30 | 98.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | |
| (B) 42 | Diameter (cm) | 4.90 | 3.80 | 3.70 | 3.10 | 1.30 | 1.20 |
| Volume (cm3) | 61.57 | 28.72 | 26.51 | 15.59 | 1.15 | 0.90 | |
| SSS | 67.30 | – | 38.00 | 8.20 | 00 | 00 | |
| QOL | 76.30 | – | 90.20 | 95.30 | 99.00 | 100.00 | |
| (C) 39 | Diameter (cm) | 4.40 | 3.70 | 3.30 | 2.00 | 1.90 | 1.90 |
| Volume (cm3) | 44.58 | 26.51 | 18.81 | 4.19 | 3.59 | 3.59 | |
| SSS | 52.40 | – | 35.30 | 00 | 00 | 00 | |
| QOL | 53.90 | – | 77.00 | 99.10 | 99.00 | 99.00 | |
| (D) 40 | Diameter (cm) | 5.2 | 4.20 | 3.60 | 3.10 | 3.10 | – |
| Volume (cm3) | 73.58 | 38.77 | 24.42 | 15.59 | 15.59 | – | |
| SSS | 31.80 | – | 10.00 | 3.20 | 3.00 | – | |
| QOL | 37.20 | – | 65.30 | 89.10 | 92.00 | – | |
| (E) 42 | Diameter (cm) | 4.5 | 3.90 | 3.20 | 2.80 | 2.60 | – |
| Volume (cm3) | 47.69 | 31.04 | 17.15 | 11.49 | 9.20 | – | |
| SSS | 40.30 | – | 8.00 | 2.00 | 1.90 | – | |
| QOL | 86.00 | – | 90.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | ||
| (F) 42 | Diameter (cm) | 4.8 | 4.1 | 3.2 | – | – | – |
| Volume (cm3) | 58.58 | 31.04 | 18.81 | – | – | – | |
| SSS | 47.2 | – | 26.00 | – | – | – | |
| QOL | 63.92 | – | 86.30 | – | – | – | |
| (G) 51 | Diameter (cm) | 5.3 | 5.3 | 5.3 | – | 3 | – |
| Volume (cm3) | 78 | 78 | 78 | – | 14 | – | |
| SSS | 50.6 | 35.20 | 23 | – | 23 | – | |
| QOL | 70.1 | 78 | 84.30 | – | 84.30 | – | |
| (H) 45 | Diameter (cm) | 8.1 | 4.8 | 4.5 | 4.5 | – | – |
| Volume (cm3) | 278 | 57 | 47 | 47 | – | – | |
| SSS | 47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | |
| QOL | 55.1 | 100 | 100 | 100 | – | – | |
| (I) 27 | Diameter (cm) | 6 | – | – | 3.9 | 3.9 | 3.5 |
| Volume (cm3) | 113 | – | – | 31 | 31 | 22 | |
| SSS | 40.5 | – | – | 18 | 18 | 18 | |
| QOL | 76.3 | – | – | 89.20 | 89.20 | 89.20 | |
| (L) 41 | Diameter (cm) | 7.06 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3.03 | 3.03 |
| Volume (cm3) | 184 | 65 | 65 | 65 | 14.60 | 14.60 | |
| SSS | 65 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 0 | 0 | |
| QOL | 53 | 87.8 | 87.8 | 87.8 | 100 | 100 | |
| (M) 34 | Diameter (cm) | 6 | 4.5 | 4.5 | Hysterectomy | ||
| Volume (cm3) | 113 | 47.6 | 47.6 | ||||
| SSS | 67.1 | 67.1 | 67.1 | ||||
| QOL | 43.8 | 43.8 | 43.8 | ||||
Fig. 1Changes in QOL during follow-up
Fig. 2Changes in volume during follow-up
Literature review
| Reference |
| Technique | Follow-up (months) | Symptom | Complication(s) | Volume reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bergamini et al. 2005 [ | 18 | Laparoscopy | 10 | SSS 4.7, QOL 100, at 6 months | 2 abdominal pain | 83% at 9 and 12 months |
| Ghezzi et al. 2007 [ | 18 + 7 | Laparoscopy | 24 | SSS 4.7, QOL 99.1, at 6 months | 1 hysterectomy at 1 year | 68.8% at 6 months, 77.9% at 1 year, 83.9% at 3 years |
| Milic et al. [ | 4 | Laparoscopy | 3 | Symptom improvement, 2/4 | 1 technical failure, 1 hysterectomy at 5 months | |
| Kim et al. [ | 35 | Embolization + percutaneous RFA | 6 | QOL 17.4 at 6 months | 1 urinary tract infection, 3 post-embolization syndrome | 56% at 6 months |
| Recaldini et al. 2007 [ | 6 | Percutaneous RFA | 7 | SSS 4.2, QOL 97.5 | 82% |
Note: N number of patients
Fig. 3A 41-year-old woman affected by a 7-cm symptomatic uterine fibroid. A B-mode US shows a hypoechoic mass in the uterus. B CEUS confirms rich vascularization inside the mass. C B-mode US 6 months after percutaneous RFA: the treated fibroid appears nonhomogeneous and reduced in size. D CEUS confirmed a huge area of necrosis with a peripheral rim of enhancement in a normal uterus without any residual disease