Uterine Fibroid Embolisation for Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids: A Survey of Clinical Practice in Europe

Item does not contain fulltextPURPOSE: To assess current uterine fibroid embolisation (UFE) practice in European countries and determine the clinical environment for UFE in different hospitals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In May 2009, an invitation for an online survey was sent by e-mail to all members of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiologic Society of Europe, representing a total number of 1,250 different candidate European treatment centres. The survey covered 21 questions concerning local UFE practice. RESULTS: A total of 282 respondents completed the questionnaire. Fifteen questionnaires were excluded because they were doubles from centres that had already returned a questionnaire. The response rate was 267 of 1,250 centres (21.4%). Ninety-four respondents (33%) did not perform UFE and were excluded, and six centres were excluded because demographic data were missing. The remaining 167 respondents from different UFE centres were included in the study. Twenty-six percent of the respondents were from the United Kingdom (n = 43); 16% were from Germany (n = 27); 11% were from France (n = 18); and the remaining 47% (n = 79) were from other European countries. Most centres (48%, n = 80) had 5 to 10 years experience with UFE and performed 10 to 50 procedures annually (53% [n = 88]) of respondents). Additional demographic data, as well as specific data on referral of patients, UFE techniques used, and periprocedural and postprocedural, care will be provided. CONCLUSION: Although UFE as an alternative treatment for hysterectomy or myomectomy is widespread in Europe, its impact on the management of the patient with symptomatic fibroids seems, according to the overall numbers of UFE procedures, somewhat disappointing. Multiple factors might be responsible for this observation

Uterine Artery Embolization in Patients with a Large Fibroid Burden: Long-Term Clinical and MR Follow-up

Uterine artery embolization (UAE) in patients with a large fibroid burden is controversial. Anecdotal reports describe serious complications and limited clinical results. We report the long-term clinical and magnetic resonance (MR) results in a large series of women with a dominant fibroid of >10 cm and/or an uterine volume of >700 cm3. Seventy-one consecutive patients (mean age, 42.5 years; median, 40 years; range, 25–52 years) with a large fibroid burden were treated by UAE between August 2000 and April 2005. Volume reduction and infarction rate of dominant fibroid and uterus were assessed by comparing the baseline and latest follow-up MRIs. Patients were clinically followed at various time intervals after UAE with standardized questionnaires. There were no serious complications of UAE. During a mean follow-up of 48 months (median, 59 months; range, 6–106 months), 10 of 71 patients (14%) had a hysterectomy. Mean volume reduction of the fibroid and uterus was 44 and 43%. Mean infarction rate of the fibroid and overall fibroid infarction rate was 86 and 87%. In the vast majority of patients there was a substantial improvement of symptoms. Clinical results were similar in patients with a dominant fibroid >10 cm and in patients with large uterine volumes by diffuse fibroid disease. In conclusion, our results indicate that the risk of serious complications after UAE in patients with a large fibroid burden is not increased. Moreover, clinical long-term results are as good as in other patients who are treated with UAE. Therefore, a large fibroid burden should not be considered a contraindication for UAE