Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso1, Di Lu2, Laine Thomas3, Michael P Diamond4, Kedra Wallace5, Ganesa Wegienka6, Anissa I Vines7, Raymond M Anchan8, Tracy Wang9, G Larry Maxwell10, Vanessa Jacoby11, Erica E Marsh12, James B Spies13, Wanda K Nicholson14, Elizabeth A Stewart15, Evan R Myers16. 1. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Electronic address: laughlintommaso.shannon@mayo.edu. 2. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Augusta University, Augusta, GA. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS. 6. Department of Public Health Sciences, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. 8. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA. 9. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC. 10. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Women's Health Integrated Research Center, Inova Health System. 11. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA. 12. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 13. Department of Radiology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC. 14. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Center for Women's Health Research, and Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 15. Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 16. Division of Reproductive Sciences, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids may decrease quality of life in a significant proportion of affected women. Myomectomy offers a uterine-sparing treatment option for patients with uterine fibroids that can be performed abdominally, laparoscopically (with or without robotic assistance), and hysteroscopically. Quality of life information using validated measures for different myomectomy routes, especially hysteroscopic myomectomy, is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare women's perception of their short-term health-related quality of life measures and reported time to return to usual activities and return to work for different routes of myomectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparing Options for Management: Patient-centered Results for Uterine Fibroids (COMPARE-UF) is a prospective nationwide fibroid registry that enrolled premenopausal women seeking treatment for uterine fibroids at 8 clinical sites. For this analysis, we included women undergoing hysteroscopic, abdominal, or laparoscopic myomectomy who completed the postprocedure questionnaire scheduled between 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. Health-related quality of life outcomes, such as pain, anxiety, and return to usual activitie, were assessed for each route. The hysteroscopic myomectomy group had large differences in demographics, fibroid number, and uterine size compared to the other groups; thus, a direct comparison of quality of life measures was performed only for abdominal and laparoscopic approaches after propensity weighting. Propensity weighting was done using 24 variables that included demographics, quality of life baseline measures, and fibroid and uterine measurements. RESULTS: A total of 1206 women from 8 COMPARE-UF sites underwent myomectomy (338 hysteroscopic, 519 laparoscopic, and 349 abdominal). All women had substantial improvement in short-term health-related quality of life and symptom severity scores, which was not different among groups. Average symptom severity scores decreased about 30 points in each group. Return to usual activities averaged 0 days (interquartile range, 0-14 days) for hysteroscopic myomectomy, 21 days (interquartile range, 14-28 days) for laparoscopic myomectomy, and 28 days (interquartile range, 14-35 days) for abdominal myomectomy. After propensity adjustment, quality of life outcomes in the laparoscopic and abdominal myomectomy groups were similar except for more anxiety in the laparoscopic myomectomy group and slightly more pain in the abdominal myomectomy group. After propensity weighting, return to usual activities favored laparoscopic compared to abdominal procedures; median time was the same at 21 days, but the highest quartile of women in the abdominal group needed an additional week of recovery (interquartile range,14.0-28.0 for laparoscopic versus 14.0-35.0 for abdominal, P < .01). Time to return to work was also longer in the abdominal arm (median, 22 days; interquartile range, 14-40 days, versus median, 42; interquartile range, 27-56). CONCLUSION: Women who underwent myomectomy had substantial improvement in health-related quality of life, regardless of route of myomectomy. After propensity weighting, abdominal myomectomy was associated with a nearly 2-week longer time to return to work than laparoscopic myomectomy.
BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids may decrease quality of life in a significant proportion of affected women. Myomectomy offers a uterine-sparing treatment option for patients with uterine fibroids that can be performed abdominally, laparoscopically (with or without robotic assistance), and hysteroscopically. Quality of life information using validated measures for different myomectomy routes, especially hysteroscopic myomectomy, is limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare women's perception of their short-term health-related quality of life measures and reported time to return to usual activities and return to work for different routes of myomectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparing Options for Management: Patient-centered Results for Uterine Fibroids (COMPARE-UF) is a prospective nationwide fibroid registry that enrolled premenopausal women seeking treatment for uterine fibroids at 8 clinical sites. For this analysis, we included women undergoing hysteroscopic, abdominal, or laparoscopic myomectomy who completed the postprocedure questionnaire scheduled between 6 and 12 weeks after surgery. Health-related quality of life outcomes, such as pain, anxiety, and return to usual activitie, were assessed for each route. The hysteroscopic myomectomy group had large differences in demographics, fibroid number, and uterine size compared to the other groups; thus, a direct comparison of quality of life measures was performed only for abdominal and laparoscopic approaches after propensity weighting. Propensity weighting was done using 24 variables that included demographics, quality of life baseline measures, and fibroid and uterine measurements. RESULTS: A total of 1206 women from 8 COMPARE-UF sites underwent myomectomy (338 hysteroscopic, 519 laparoscopic, and 349 abdominal). All women had substantial improvement in short-term health-related quality of life and symptom severity scores, which was not different among groups. Average symptom severity scores decreased about 30 points in each group. Return to usual activities averaged 0 days (interquartile range, 0-14 days) for hysteroscopic myomectomy, 21 days (interquartile range, 14-28 days) for laparoscopic myomectomy, and 28 days (interquartile range, 14-35 days) for abdominal myomectomy. After propensity adjustment, quality of life outcomes in the laparoscopic and abdominal myomectomy groups were similar except for more anxiety in the laparoscopic myomectomy group and slightly more pain in the abdominal myomectomy group. After propensity weighting, return to usual activities favored laparoscopic compared to abdominal procedures; median time was the same at 21 days, but the highest quartile of women in the abdominal group needed an additional week of recovery (interquartile range,14.0-28.0 for laparoscopic versus 14.0-35.0 for abdominal, P < .01). Time to return to work was also longer in the abdominal arm (median, 22 days; interquartile range, 14-40 days, versus median, 42; interquartile range, 27-56). CONCLUSION:Women who underwent myomectomy had substantial improvement in health-related quality of life, regardless of route of myomectomy. After propensity weighting, abdominal myomectomy was associated with a nearly 2-week longer time to return to work than laparoscopic myomectomy.
Authors: Kedra Wallace; Elizabeth A Stewart; Lauren A Wise; Wanda Kay Nicholson; John Preston Parry; Shuaiqi Zhang; Shannon Laughlin-Tommaso; Vanessa Jacoby; Raymond M Anchan; Michael P Diamond; Sateria Venable; Amber Shiflett; Ganesa R Wegienka; George Larry Maxwell; Daniel Wojdyla; Evan R Myers; Erica Marsh Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: K P K R Karunagoda; P K Perera; H Senanayake; S De Silva Weliange Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2021-06-28 Impact factor: 2.629