Literature DB >> 25571883

Safety and Effectiveness of UFE in Fibroids Larger than 10 cm.

Viktor Bérczi1, Éva Valcseva2, Dóra Kozics3, Ildikó Kalina4, Pál Kaposi5, Péter Sziller6, Szabolcs Várbíró7, Erzsébet Mária Botos8.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Early literature suggested that the size of the uterus, the size of the dominant fibroid, and the amount of applied embolization particles would be the risk factors for major postprocedural complications, but recent publications have confuted these early results. The purpose of our study was to evaluate whether the size of the dominant fibroid would influence the complication rate and effectiveness in a large single-center cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 28 April 2008 until 31 December 2012, 303 patients had uterine artery embolization (UAE). 262 patients had small [largest diameter <10 cm (Group 1)], 41 patients had large [largest diameter >10 cm (Group 2)] fibroid. UAE was performed from unilateral femoral access using 500-710 and 355-500 µm polyvinyl alcohol particles. Periprocedural and postprocedural complications and numerical analog quality-of-life scores (0-unbearable symptoms; 100-perfect quality of life) were listed and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: During the mean follow-up time [7.79 ± 5.16 (SD) month], data on 275 patients (275/303 = 90.8 %) were available. Quality-of-life score was 33.3 ± 23.5 and 33.5 ± 24.1 before, whereas 85.6 ± 16.0 and 81.5 ± 23.5 after UAE in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively, (Mann-Whitney U test one-sided, p = 0.365). There were 4 myoma expulsions, 1 acute myomectomy, and 2 acute hysterectomies reported from Group 1, meanwhile 1 myoma expulsion, 1 acute myomectomy, and 2 acute hysterectomies were documented from Group 2 (NS differences).
CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the effectiveness and in the number of minor and major complications between fibroids with <10 cm largest diameter compared to those >10 cm.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute hysterectomy and myomectomy; Dominant fibroid; Major complications; Uterine artery embolization (UAE)

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25571883     DOI: 10.1007/s00270-014-1045-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol        ISSN: 0174-1551            Impact factor:   2.740


  6 in total

Review 1.  Updates on Uterine Artery Embolization.

Authors:  Maureen P Kohi; James B Spies
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 1.513

2.  Uterine artery embolization, surgery and high intensity focused ultrasound in the treatment of uterine fibroids: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Haijun Gao; Tianping Li; Dianxun Fu; Jun Wei
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-09

3.  Short- and long-term evaluation of disease-specific symptoms and quality of life following uterine artery embolization of fibroids.

Authors:  Iason Psilopatis; Florian Nima Fleckenstein; Federico Collettini; Elif Can; Anne Frisch; Bernhard Gebauer; Uli Fehrenbach; Giovanni Federico Torsello; Dirk Schnapauff; Matthias David; Gero Wieners
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-06-21

4.  Hyperkalemia and acute kidney failure associated with preoperative uterine artery embolization for a large uterine fibroid: a case report.

Authors:  Keiko Tanaka; Toshimitsu Koizumi; Takeru Higa; Noriaki Imai
Journal:  J Med Case Rep       Date:  2016-11-01

5.  Uncommon Complication of Uterine Artery Embolization: Expulsion of Infarcted Myoma and Uterine Sepsis.

Authors:  Juliana G Martins; Dawn Gaudenti; Frank Crespo; Dervi Ganesh; Usha Verma
Journal:  Case Rep Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-03-17

6.  Clinical, Imaging and Procedural Risk Factors for Intrauterine Infective Complications After Uterine Fibroid Embolisation: A Retrospective Case Control Study.

Authors:  Josephine Mollier; Neeral R Patel; Alison Amoah; Mohamad Hamady; Stephen D Quinn
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 2.740

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.