Uterine artery embolisation: fertility, adenomyosis and size - what is the evidence?

Adenomyosis Complications Fertility Giant fibroids Large fibroid volume Miscarriage rate Outcomes Pregnancy rate Re-intervention Uterine artery embolisation

Journal

CVIR endovascular
ISSN: 2520-8934
Titre abrégé: CVIR Endovasc
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101738484

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Feb 2023
Historique:
received: 17 10 2022
accepted: 08 02 2023
entrez: 27 2 2023
pubmed: 28 2 2023
medline: 28 2 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Uterine artery embolisation is well established as a treatment for symptomatic fibroids, however, there remain some uncertainties. We have carried out a focused literature review on three particularly challenging aspects - post-procedure fertility, symptomatic adenomyosis and large volume fibroids and uteri, to enable operators to utilise evidence-based guidance in patient selection, consent, and management. Literature searches were performed of the PubMed/Medline, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. The outcomes of our analysis of studies which recorded fertility rates in women desiring pregnancy following UAE for symptomatic fibroids found an overall mean pregnancy rate of 39.4%, live birth rate of 69.2% and miscarriage rate of 22%. The major confounding factor was patient age with many studies including women over 40 years who already have lower fertility compared to younger cohorts. Miscarriage rates and pregnancy rates in the studies analysed were comparable to the age matched population. Treatment of pure adenomyosis and adenomyosis with co-existing uterine fibroids with UAE has been shown to produce symptomatic improvement with better outcomes in those with combined disease. Although the effectiveness is not as high as it is in pure fibroid disease, UAE provides a viable and safe alternative for patients seeking symptom relief and uterine preservation. Our analysis of studies assessing the outcomes of UAE in patients with large volume uteri and giant fibroids (> 10 cm) demonstrate no significant difference in major complication rates demonstrating that fibroid size should not be a contraindication to UAE. Our findings suggest uterine artery embolisation can be offered to women desiring pregnancy with fertility and miscarriage rates comparable to that of the age-matched general population. It is also an effective therapeutic option for symptomatic adenomyosis as well as for the treatment of large fibroids > 10 cm in diameter. Caution is advised in those with uterine volumes greater than 1000cm

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Uterine artery embolisation is well established as a treatment for symptomatic fibroids, however, there remain some uncertainties. We have carried out a focused literature review on three particularly challenging aspects - post-procedure fertility, symptomatic adenomyosis and large volume fibroids and uteri, to enable operators to utilise evidence-based guidance in patient selection, consent, and management.
REVIEW METHODS
Literature searches were performed of the PubMed/Medline, Google scholar, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. The outcomes of our analysis of studies which recorded fertility rates in women desiring pregnancy following UAE for symptomatic fibroids found an overall mean pregnancy rate of 39.4%, live birth rate of 69.2% and miscarriage rate of 22%. The major confounding factor was patient age with many studies including women over 40 years who already have lower fertility compared to younger cohorts. Miscarriage rates and pregnancy rates in the studies analysed were comparable to the age matched population. Treatment of pure adenomyosis and adenomyosis with co-existing uterine fibroids with UAE has been shown to produce symptomatic improvement with better outcomes in those with combined disease. Although the effectiveness is not as high as it is in pure fibroid disease, UAE provides a viable and safe alternative for patients seeking symptom relief and uterine preservation. Our analysis of studies assessing the outcomes of UAE in patients with large volume uteri and giant fibroids (> 10 cm) demonstrate no significant difference in major complication rates demonstrating that fibroid size should not be a contraindication to UAE.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Our findings suggest uterine artery embolisation can be offered to women desiring pregnancy with fertility and miscarriage rates comparable to that of the age-matched general population. It is also an effective therapeutic option for symptomatic adenomyosis as well as for the treatment of large fibroids > 10 cm in diameter. Caution is advised in those with uterine volumes greater than 1000cm

Identifiants

pubmed: 36847951
doi: 10.1186/s42155-023-00353-2
pii: 10.1186/s42155-023-00353-2
pmc: PMC9971423
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

8

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006 Mar;17(3):471-80
pubmed: 16567671
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Jun;24(6):772-8
pubmed: 23566524
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011 Jul;22(7):901-9; quiz 909
pubmed: 21570318
Fertil Steril. 2000 Jun;73(6):1241-3
pubmed: 10856491
Radiology. 2017 Oct;285(1):302-310
pubmed: 28608747
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001 Jul;74(1):1-7
pubmed: 11430934
Hum Reprod Update. 1998 Jul-Aug;4(4):312-22
pubmed: 9825847
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Nov;195(5):1266-71
pubmed: 16796984
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012 Oct;35(5):1041-52
pubmed: 22526109
Fertil Steril. 2014 Mar;101(3):633-4
pubmed: 24559617
Health Technol Assess. 2008 Mar;12(5):1-248, iii
pubmed: 18331704
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007 Jul;18(7):835-41
pubmed: 17609441
Fertil Steril. 2008 Dec;90(6):2356-60
pubmed: 18339388
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012 Aug;35(4):815-9
pubmed: 21717251
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2013 Feb;22(1):39-44
pubmed: 23033956
Radiology. 1998 Sep;208(3):625-9
pubmed: 9722838
Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011;66(5):807-10
pubmed: 21789384
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011 Apr;22(4):497-502
pubmed: 21377897
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Dec 26;(12):CD005073
pubmed: 25541260
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2021 Nov 20;13:100139
pubmed: 34877531
Fertil Steril. 2003 Jan;79(1):132-5
pubmed: 12524076
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Oct;225(4):403.e1-403.e22
pubmed: 34058169
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Aug;177(2):297-302
pubmed: 11461849
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013 Jan;287(1):71-6
pubmed: 22907793
BJOG. 2004 Mar;111(3):239-42
pubmed: 14961885
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017 Dec;28(12):1629-1642.e1
pubmed: 29032946
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010 Oct;33(5):943-8
pubmed: 20066419
Radiology. 1998 Aug;208(2):359-62
pubmed: 9680559
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010 May;32(5):460-466
pubmed: 20500955
BJOG. 2002 Nov;109(11):1262-72
pubmed: 12452465
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010 Oct;33(5):955-9
pubmed: 20442999
Lancet. 1995 Sep 9;346(8976):671-2
pubmed: 7544859
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012 Jun;35(3):523-9
pubmed: 21850565
Semin Reprod Med. 2020 May;38(2-03):108-118
pubmed: 33080632
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017 Sep;40(9):1344-1350
pubmed: 28516272
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jan;111(1):22-33
pubmed: 18165389
Eur Radiol. 2017 Jul;27(7):2850-2859
pubmed: 27966042
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Jan;188(1):176-81
pubmed: 17179361
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015 Feb;38(1):65-71
pubmed: 24692030
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 Mar;37(3):277-285
pubmed: 26001875
Fertil Steril. 2008 Nov;90(5):1886-91
pubmed: 18155701
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015 Sep;26(9):1290-6.e2
pubmed: 26074028
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008 May-Jun;31(3):521-6
pubmed: 18219521
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020 May;43(5):684-693
pubmed: 31792586
Radiology. 2000 May;215(2):428-31
pubmed: 10796920
Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jan;105(1):67-76
pubmed: 15625144
JMIR Res Protoc. 2018 Mar 01;7(3):e47
pubmed: 29496654
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Nov;181(5):1309-14
pubmed: 14573425
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020 Dec;43(12):1910-1917
pubmed: 32851424
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008 Feb;19(2 Pt 1):195-200
pubmed: 18341948
Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Dec;106(6):1309-18
pubmed: 16319257
BMJ. 2000 Jun 24;320(7251):1708-12
pubmed: 10864550
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Jun;192(6):1588-92
pubmed: 19457822
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015 Oct;38(5):1152-6
pubmed: 25571883
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Aug;21(8):1153-63
pubmed: 20558083
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020 Aug;43(8):1122-1133
pubmed: 32458009
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013 Sep;73(9):924-931
pubmed: 24771944
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 Dec;165(2):156-64
pubmed: 22939241
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008 Jan-Feb;31(1):73-85
pubmed: 17943348

Auteurs

Leto Mailli (L)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Shyamal Patel (S)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Raj Das (R)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Joo Young Chun (JY)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Seyed Renani (S)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Sourav Das (S)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK.

Lakshmi Ratnam (L)

Department of Interventional Radiology, St George's University Hospital, London, UK. lakshmi.ratnam@stgeorges.nhs.uk.

Classifications MeSH