Comparison of two invasive non-surgical treatment options for uterine myomas: uterine artery embolization and magnetic resonance guided high intensity focused ultrasound—systematic review

Madina Yerezhepbayeva, Milan Terzić, Gulzhanat Nuratdinovna Aimagambetova, Byron Lawrence Crape

BMC Women s Health, 2022

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1186/s12905-022-01627-y
Data confidence 85 high
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE) and Magnetic Resonance guided High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (MRgHIFU) are two noninvasive treatments for uterine leiomyoma. METHODS: This systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines, analyzed the effectiveness of two treatments by comparing percent fibroid volume shrinkage immediately after the procedure and after 3, 6, 12 and 24 months of follow-up and also assessed and compared common complications following treatment. The search utilized Science Direct, PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and BioMed Central databases, selecting manuscripts published during the period 2000 and 2020. Studies with premenopausal patients with previous treatments for uterine leiomyoma and/or with other pelvic diseases were excluded. RESULTS: Twenty-nine papers satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results were pooled and stratified by treatment and follow-up time. Weighted fibroid volume percent shrinkage after UAE was statistically significantly greater than MRgHIFU at 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up times. However, UAE had statistically significantly more complications, such as pain, nausea and vomiting. However, this study cannot conclude that UAE is more effective than MRgHIFU due to confounding factors.