Carmine Di Stasi1, Alessandro Cina1, Francesco Rosella2, Andrea Paladini1, Sonia Amoroso3, Daniela Romualdi3, Riccardo Manfredi4, Cesare Colosimo5. 1. Interventional Radiology, Department of Bioimaging, Policlinico Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 2. Interventional Radiology, Department of Bioimaging, Policlinico Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. francesco.rosella.md@gmail.com. 3. Gynecology, Department of Women Health, Policlinico Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 4. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Department of Bioimaging, Policlinico Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy. 5. Department of Bioimaging, Policlinico Agostino Gemelli, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effectiveness and safety of UFE as alternative to surgery, in treatment of uterine fibromatosis. METHODS/MATERIALS: 255 patients (aged 26-55) with symptomatic UF, indication for surgery, followed in our center (2000-2014), single or multiple fibroids, pain and/or functional/compressive disorders, underwent embolization: injection of PVA particles (150-900 μm) from distal portion of uterine arteries (ascending section). Primary end-point: flow-stop distally to injection site, disappearance of lesion design, preservation of flow in main trunk of UA. Secondary end-point: control of pain and functional/compressive disorders during follow-up (2-7 years). RESULTS: Procedure was performed bilaterally in 250 patients (98%). Mean duration: 47 min (average fluoroscopy: 10:50 min). Post-embolization pelvic pain (according with VAS score) was on average 2.2 at discharge (24 h). Follow-up at 2 years: resolution of menstrual disorders in 78% of patients and improvement in 14%; pain disappeared in 66%; significant improvement of menstrual flow and HCT/HB levels, decrease in total uterine (57.7%)/dominant fibroid (76.1%) volume. Recurrence in 18 patients. CONCLUSIONS: UFE represents an excellent alternative to surgical treatment: it is safe, tolerable and effective both in short and long term, with evident advantages in economic and social terms.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effectiveness and safety of UFE as alternative to surgery, in treatment of uterine fibromatosis. METHODS/MATERIALS: 255 patients (aged 26-55) with symptomatic UF, indication for surgery, followed in our center (2000-2014), single or multiple fibroids, pain and/or functional/compressive disorders, underwent embolization: injection of PVA particles (150-900 μm) from distal portion of uterine arteries (ascending section). Primary end-point: flow-stop distally to injection site, disappearance of lesion design, preservation of flow in main trunk of UA. Secondary end-point: control of pain and functional/compressive disorders during follow-up (2-7 years). RESULTS: Procedure was performed bilaterally in 250 patients (98%). Mean duration: 47 min (average fluoroscopy: 10:50 min). Post-embolization pelvic pain (according with VAS score) was on average 2.2 at discharge (24 h). Follow-up at 2 years: resolution of menstrual disorders in 78% of patients and improvement in 14%; pain disappeared in 66%; significant improvement of menstrual flow and HCT/HB levels, decrease in total uterine (57.7%)/dominant fibroid (76.1%) volume. Recurrence in 18 patients. CONCLUSIONS:UFE represents an excellent alternative to surgical treatment: it is safe, tolerable and effective both in short and long term, with evident advantages in economic and social terms.
Authors: Michal Mara; Petr Horak; Kristyna Kubinova; Pavel Dundr; Tomas Belsan; David Kuzel Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Res Date: 2012-03-13 Impact factor: 1.730
Authors: S C Goodwin; B McLucas; M Lee; G Chen; R Perrella; S Vedantham; S Muir; A Lai; J W Sayre; M DeLeon Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: David M Hovsepian; Valerie S Ratts; Michael Rodriguez; Jessica S Huang; Mira G Aubuchon; Thomas K Pilgram Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Gaylene Pron; Eva Mocarski; John Bennett; George Vilos; Andrew Common; Mukarram Zaidi; Kenneth Sniderman; Murray Asch; Roman Kozak; Martin Simons; Cuong Tran; John Kachura Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Sundeep S Toor; Kongteng T Tan; Martin E Simons; Dheeraj K Rajan; J Robert Beecroft; Eran Hayeems; Kenneth W Sniderman Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2008-03-17 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Nicole A Volkers; Wouter J K Hehenkamp; Erwin Birnie; Willem M Ankum; Jim A Reekers Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Cyrus W Beh; Yingli Fu; Clifford R Weiss; Charles Hu; Aravind Arepally; Hai-Quan Mao; Tza-Huei Wang; Dara L Kraitchman Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 6.799