[Prospective clinical and sonographic assessment of uterine artery embolization as the treatment of symptomatic uterine leiomyomata]
other
OA: closed
public-domain-us
AI-generated summary
Uterine artery embolization was an effective treatment for symptomatic uterine leiomyomata, reducing uterus and fibroid volume by 51% and 65% respectively with a 12.5% failure rate over 18.9 months.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the uterine artery embolization as the treatment of symptomatic uterine leiomyomata.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-five women with symptoms caused by uterine leiomyomata underwent uterine artery embolization as an alternative to surgery from january 1997 to june 2000. The effectiveness of this method was evaluated by clinical and sonographic examination.
RESULTS: The recession average was of 18.9 months. There were ten failures. We had immediate failures (n = 5) with a case of technical failure, one endometrium cancer, one adenomyosis, one larger subserosal leiomyomata and one parametrial leiomyomata. We had recurrences (n = 5) with the occurrence of new leiomyomatas (1 intramural and 3 submucosal) and an evolution of previous leiomyomata. The average volume reduction was 51% for the uterus and 65% for the main fibroid at one year follow-up. Minor complications occurred in 5%. Permanent amenorrhoea was observed for 3.75% of the women. Using cox model, no predictive factors of embolisation effectiveness were found.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In the treatment of symptomatic uterine leiomyoma, uterine artery embolization is an effective alternative to surgery. After one year and half, we had 12.5% of failures.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Condition tags
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
References (20)
- doi:10.1016/0002-9378(76)90471-3 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92282-2 via crossref
- doi:10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma11428 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70213-7 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)02987-6 via crossref
- doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11119.x via crossref
- doi:10.1097/00001703-199808000-00006 via crossref
- doi:10.1007/s002709900280 via crossref
- doi:10.7863/jum.2000.19.10.701 via crossref
- doi:10.1148/radiology.214.3.r00fe07729 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70208-3 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70213-7 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70212-5 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s0889-8545(21)00657-4 via crossref
- doi:10.1289/ehp.00108s5835 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70235-6 via crossref
- doi:10.1148/radiology.208.3.9722838 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70212-5 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61422-5 via crossref
- doi:10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00738-9 via crossref
Source provenance
- crossref
- last seen: 2026-05-29T01:00:17.908707+00:00
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-08-13T06:15:24.848197+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-05-13T22:12:55.732728+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-08-13T06:47:16.638238+00:00
License: public-domain-us
· commercial use OK
· attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine