Transvaginal Expulsion of a Fibroid After Transvaginal Radiofrequency Ablation: A Complication or a Benefit?

Cannone F, Morreale G, Billeci M, Ferdinando Antonio Gulino
Reports (MDPI) · 2026 · doi:10.3390/reports9020145 · PMID:42200849 · PMC13214798
OA: gold CC-BY-4.0
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

Uterine fibroids are among the most common benign tumors affecting women, with a prevalence reaching up to 50-60% in those over 40 years of age, although often underestimated due to asymptomatic cases. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) represents a minimally invasive alternative to surgery for selected patients. We report the case of a 41-year-old woman with symptomatic uterine fibroids (FIGO type 4, size of 5 cm) treated with transvaginal RFA. One month post- treatment, the fibroid showed partial volume reduction. Two months after the procedure, the patient presented with foul-smelling discharge and heavy bleeding. Ultrasound confirmed complete fibroid migration into the cervical canal. Vaginal removal was performed without complications. Fibroid expulsion after RFA is a rare event that may represent either a complication or a therapeutic outcome. A balanced interpretation and appropriate clinical management are required. Further studies are needed to clarify its clinical significance.
Full text 1,357 characters · extracted from epmc-fulltextxml · 8 sections · click to expand

Data

The original contributions presented in this work are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author

Conceptualization, M.B.; investigation, G.M.; resources, M.B.; data curation, F.A.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.B.; writing—review and editing, F.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Fn Group

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Informed

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. Written informed consent has been obtained from the patient to publish this paper.

Conflicts

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Institutional

Ethical review and approval were waived for this study; the ASP Siracusa Ethics Committee on Scientific Ethics waived the need for IRB approval for the case report, wherein the patient had signed informed consent.

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in this work are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

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.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: epmc-fulltextxml ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

SciLite annotations

organisms 1
noordeloos 2009062

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-23T09:30:01.253652+00:00
scilite
last seen: 2026-08-16T09:53:34.102730+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0 · commercial use OK · attribution required
Per Europe PMC