| Literature DB >> 35800452 |
Masita Arip1, Vi Lien Yap2, Mogana Rajagopal2, Malarvili Selvaraja2, K Dharmendra3, Sasikala Chinnapan2.
Abstract
Uterine fibroids (UFs) are a common benign gynecological tumor that affect the majority of women over their lifetime. Several pharmacological agents are available to reduce the size of fibroids and ameliorate the symptoms of UF. However, these drugs are expensive and are usually associated with profound side effects. Thus, botanical drugs are gaining attention in this era due to their cost effectiveness with a comparable and more potent therapeutic efficacy while demonstrating lesser adverse effects. The objective of this review is to summarize the available information on the mechanism of various botanical drugs and polyherbal formulations with anti-uterine fibroid activity. A systematic search was performed on botanical drugs with anti-uterine fibroid activity using several search engines, which include PubMed, Google Scholar, and Science Direct. Based on the literatures identified, a total of five botanical drugs and three polyherbal formulations were included and discussed in this review, which yields useful information regarding the mechanism of different botanical drugs and polyherbal formulations in exerting anti-uterine fibroid activity for its potential use as an alternative treatment choice for uterine fibroids.Entities:
Keywords: botanical drug; leiomyoma; management; mechanism; polyherbal; uterine fibroids
Year: 2022 PMID: 35800452 PMCID: PMC9256340 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.878407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.988
FIGURE 1Schematic representation of a selection of articles.
Possible benefits and drawbacks of surgical and pharmacological interventions.
| Intervention | Benefits | Drawbacks |
|---|---|---|
| Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist ( | • Greater fibroid and uterine volume reduction than SPRM | |
| • Increase preoperative hemoglobin | • Greater adverse effects, especially hot flushes and bone loss on prolonged use | |
| • Reduce blood loss during surgery | • Risk of disease recurrence | |
| • Fewer postoperative complications | ||
| • Uterus is preserved | ||
| Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist ( | • Significant reduction in menstrual blood loss | • Risk of hot flushes, metrorrhagia and bone loss on prolonged use |
| • Uterus is preserved | ||
| • Reduce uterine or fibroid volume | ||
| • Rapid symptoms improvement | ||
| • Do not trigger FSH and LH surge | ||
| Selective Progesterone Receptor Modulator (SPRM) ( | • Less hot flushes than GnRH agonist | |
| • Reduce uterine or fibroid volume | • Progesterone receptor modulator-associated endometrial changes | |
| • Increase preoperative hemoglobin | • Risk of disease recurrence | |
| • Reduce blood loss during surgery | ||
| • No hypoestrogenic side effects | ||
| Aromatase Inhibitor ( | • Reduce fibroid size | • Bone loss on prolonged use |
| • Uterus is preserved | ||
| • Fewer vasomotor adverse effect than GnRH agonist | ||
| • Rapid onset of action than GnRH agonist | ||
| Levonorgestrel-intrauterine device ( | • Most effective for reducing blood loss | • Irregular bleeding |
| • Reduce fibroid and/or uterine volume | • Increase risk of device expulsion | |
| Hysterectomy ( | • Definitive treatment | • Increase risk of blood loss, postoperative fever, and surgical site infection |
| • Improved quality of life and satisfaction | • Uterus is removed | |
| Myomectomy ( | • Able to preserve fertility | • Risk of myoma recurrence |
| • Lower rate of complication | • Risk of bleeding | |
| Uterine artery embolization ( | • Minimally invasive | |
| • Shorter duration of hospitalization | • Higher risk of minor complication | |
| • Shorter recovery time | • Risk of myoma recurrence and reintervention | |
| • Less major complications | ||
| Focused ultrasound surgery (USgFUS and MRgFUS) ( | • Noninvasive | • Risk of skin burn, weakness, or numbness of the lower limbs |
| • Shorter duration of hospitalization | • Risk of myoma recurrence and reintervention | |
| • Less morbidity |
FIGURE 2Summarized anti-uterine fibroid mechanisms of various botanical drugs and polyherbal formulations. Adapted from (Islam et al., 2013).
FIGURE 3Common anti-uterine fibroid mechanism between botanical drugs and polyherbal formulation.