Abstract
Purpose Uterine leiomyomas are common benign tumors that arise from smooth muscle and can significantly impact quality of life. Over the past two decades, uterine artery embolization has risen as a minimally invasive alternative treatment to hysterectomy or myomectomy for the management of leiomyomas. While prior work has established the safety of this procedure, there exist few reports quantifying sequelae, notably rates of subsequent treatment and primary ovarian insufficiency. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the efficacy of uterine artery embolization as well as to investigate the frequency of gynecologic reintervention and primary ovarian insufficiency following treatment.
Methods
The study cohort consisted of patients (n=199) who presented with symptoms concerning for uterine pathology and with leiomyoma(s) confirmed by MRI. This cohort underwent embolization between January 2013 and December 2018 at a single academic institution. Data was collected from retrospective chart review and included demographics, symptomology, imaging, procedural details, and follow-up care. This data was subsequently analyzed to quantify the frequencies of various outcomes at 4–10 years following embolization.
Results
Of 199 symptomatic patients with confirmed leiomyomas, all underwent technically successful uterine artery embolization. At the time of follow-up, information was available for 188 (94.5%) patients, of which 145 (77.1%) reported significant symptomatic improvement while 34 required additional intervention—either medical (9%) or surgical (9%). The most common secondary medical management involved hormone therapy, while the most common subsequent gynecologic procedure was a hysterectomy. Additionally, there were seven (3.7%) cases of amenorrhea following embolization.
Conclusion
Given its minimally invasive nature, rapid recovery time, and uterine-sparing capability, uterine artery embolization should be considered a frontline therapy for symptomatic leiomyomas. This study supports an overall low complication rate, limited hospitalization time, near-complete resolution of symptoms, and low risk of ovarian dysfunction for a majority of patients. Following embolization, only 9% of patients required additional medical management, and only 9% required a second procedural intervention.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of Duke University School of Medicine gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.