AI Article Synopsis
- The study compares uterine artery embolization (UAE) with surgery (hysterectomy/myomectomy) for treating heavy menstrual bleeding due to uterine fibroids in premenopausal women.
- In the short-term, UAE resulted in less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and faster return to work compared to surgery.
- In the mid- and long-term, while both procedures had similar quality of life outcomes and patient satisfaction, the UAE group experienced a higher rate of reinterventions.
Article Abstract
Objective: To summarize the evidence on short-, mid-, and long-term results up to 5 years of uterine artery embolization in comparison to surgery.
Study Design: We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for randomized clinical trials comparing uterine artery embolization with hysterectomy/myomectomy in premenopausal women with heavy menstrual bleeding caused by symptomatic uterine fibroids, written from September 1995 to November 2010. Two reviewers independently assessed methodologic quality and extracted data from included trials.
Results: Four randomized controlled trials with a total of 515 patients were included. On the short-term, uterine artery embolization showed fewer blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and quicker resumption of work. Mid- and long-term results showed comparable health-related quality of life results and a higher reintervention rate in the uterine artery embolization group, whereas both groups were equally satisfied.
Conclusion: Uterine artery embolization has short-term advantages over surgery. On the mid- and long-term the benefits were similar, except for a higher reintervention rate after uterine artery embolization.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.016 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!