Advertisement

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 523–529 | Cite as

Uterine Artery Embolization to Treat Uterine Adenomyosis with or without Uterine Leiomyomata: Results of Symptom Control and Health-Related Quality of Life 40 Months after Treatment

  • V. Froeling
  • C. Scheurig-Muenkler
  • B. Hamm
  • T. J. Kroencke
Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical outcome for uterine adenomyosis with or without uterine leiomyomata 40 months after uterine artery embolization (UAE).

Methods

Forty women aged 39–56 years (median 46 years) with symptomatic uterine adenomyosis and magnetic resonance imaging findings of uterine adenomyosis with or without combined uterine leiomyomata underwent UAE. Self-perceived changes in clinical symptoms were assessed, and residual symptom severity and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after UAE were evaluated. Clinical failure was defined as no symptomatic improvement or second invasive therapy after UAE. Results were stratified by the extent of uterine adenomyosis at baseline magnetic resonance imaging.

Results

Patients were followed for a median of 40 months (range 5–102 months). UAE led to symptomatic control after UAE in 29 (72.5%) of 40 patients while 11 women underwent hysterectomy (n = 10) or dilatation and curettage (n = 1) for therapy failure. No significant difference between women with pure uterine adenoymosis and women with uterine adenomyosis combined with uterine leiomyomata was observed. Best results were shown for UAE in uterine adenomyosis with uterine leiomyomata predominance as opposed to predominant uterine adenomyosis with minor fibroid disease (clinical failure 0% vs. 31.5%, P = 0.058). Throughout the study group, HRQOL score values increased and symptom severity scores decreased after UAE. Least improvement was noted for women with pure adenomyosis.

Conclusions

UAE is clinically effective in the long term in most women with uterine adenomyosis. Symptomatic control and HRQOL were highest in patients with combined disease of uterine adenomyosis but leiomyomata predominance.

Keywords

Arterial intervention Embolization Embolotherapy Fibroid MRI/MRA Uterine artery embolization 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Matalliotakis IM, Kourtis AI, Panidis DK (2003) Adenomyosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 30:63–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ferenczy A (1998) Pathophysiology of adenomyosis. Hum Reprod Update 4:312–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergeron C, Amant F, Ferency A (2006) Pathology and physiopathology of adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 20:511–521PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES et al (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 76:588–594PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bazot M, Cortez A, Darai E et al (2001) Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 16:2427–2433PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM et al (1996) Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 199:151–158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ascher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH et al (1994) Adenomyosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 190:803–806PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dumousset E, Chabrot P, Rabischong B et al (2008) Preoperative uterine artery embolization (PUAE) before uterine myomectomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31:512–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goodwin SC, Spies JB (2009) Uterine fibroid embolization. N Engl J Med 361:690–697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katsumori T, Kasahara T, Kin Y et al (2007) Magnetic resonance angiography of uterine artery: changes with embolization using gelatine sponge particles alone for fibroids. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 30:398–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spies JB, Bruno J, Czeyda-Pommersheim F et al (2005) Long-term outcome of uterine artery embolization of leiomyomata. Obstet Gynecol 106(5 Pt 1):933–939PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCausland V, McCausland A (1998) The response of adenomyosis to endometrial ablation/resection. Hum Reprod Update 4:350–359PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jha RC, Takahama J, Imaoka I et al (2003) Adenomyosis: MRI of the uterus treated with uterine artery embolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:851–856PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim MD, Won JW, Lee DY et al (2004) Uterine artery embolization for adenomyosis without fibroids. Clin Radiol 59:520–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kitamura Y, Allison SJ, Jha RC et al (2006) MRI of adenomyosis: changes with uterine artery embolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:855–864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Siskin GP, Tublin ME, Stainken BF et al (2001) Uterine artery embolization for the treatment of adenomyosis: clinical response and evaluation with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:297–302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lohle PN, De Vries J, Klazen CA et al (2007) Uterine artery embolization for symptomatic adenomyosis with or without uterine leiomyomas with the use of calibrated tris-acryl gelatin microspheres: midterm clinical and MR imaging follow-up. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18:835–841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spies JB, Coyne K, Guaou Guaou N et al (2002) The UFS-QOL, a new disease-specific symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire for leiomyomata. Obstet Gynecol 99:290–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gordts S, Brosens JJ, Fusi L et al (2008) Uterine adenomyosis: a need for uniform terminology and consensus classification. Reprod Biomed Online 17:244–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bazot M, Lafont C, Rouzier R et al (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of physical examination, transvaginal sonography, rectal endoscopic sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose deep infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil Steril 92:1825–1833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Farquhar C, Brosens I (2006) Medical and surgical management of adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 20:603–616PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fukunishi H, Funaki K, Sawada K et al (2008) Early results of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery of adenomyosis: analysis of 20 cases. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:571–579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bratby MJ, Walker WJ (2009) Uterine artery embolisation for symptomatic adenomyosis—mid-term results. Eur J Radiol 70:128–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pelage JP, Jacob D, Fazel A et al (2005) Midterm results of uterine artery embolization for symptomatic adenomyosis: initial experience. Radiology 234:948–953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim MD, Kim S, Kim NK et al (2007) Long-term results of uterine artery embolization for symptomatic adenomyosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:176–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Daraï E, Coutant C, Bazot M et al (2009) Relevance of quality of life questionnaires in women with endometriosis. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 37:240–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Froeling
    • 1
  • C. Scheurig-Muenkler
    • 1
  • B. Hamm
    • 1
  • T. J. Kroencke
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyCharité—Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations