Main Findings
In our study population, patients with increased BMI or uterine volume > 1000cm3 had significantly higher risk of developing an infection post-UFE compared to the control UFE population. Such factors should be taken into consideration when offering UFE to patients, and in counselling women regarding the risks of UFE.
Obese patients were found to have 1.53 times (CI: 1.18–1.99) greater risk of developing infection. The median anterior wall fat measurement for patients requiring emergency hysterectomy after uterine sepsis was also notably greater than the control UFE population. The literature regarding obesity as a predictor for post-UFE infection specifically is sparse, but studies investigating surgical patients have found patients with high BMI are at higher risk of developing infection post-procedure [8]. There is also evidence to suggest that patients with infective complications and increased BMI are more likely to have worse outcomes when compared to patients with healthy BMI (BMI < 25) [9]. This is supported by laboratory observations that inflammatory response, production of inflammatory cytokines and microvascular integrity is dysregulated in obese patients [10]. Microvascular dysfunction has a key role in the pathophysiology of sepsis [11], and therefore obese patients may be more likely to develop septic uteri requiring hysterectomy. AWF may in fact be a better predictor of post-UFE infection risk than BMI, as BMI measured using height and weight can be exaggerated by larger uteri.
Increased fibroid burden may lead to an increased volume of devascularised, necrotic tissue post-embolisation, which may lead to an increased risk of infection [12]. In this study, uterine volume, and not dominant fibroid diameter, was shown to have a significant effect on the risk of post-UFE infection. While high uterine volume can be due to a giant fibroid, using dominant fibroid diameter as an indicator of the fibroid load does not account for patients with innumerate small fibroids. The current study reports three times greater odds of infection, as well as a 1.8% risk of emergency hysterectomy, in patients with larger uteri, compared to patients with uteri less than 1000cm3. The presence of a giant fibroid did not significantly increase infection risk. This suggests that UFE is a safe treatment option for women with giant dominant fibroids.
Improved identification of high-risk patients will lead to better preparation from medical personnel involved in the care of these patients regarding infection risk, and therefore earlier diagnosis and initiation of aggressive treatment. Earlier antibiotic treatment may reduce the need for emergency hysterectomy due to sepsis. Additionally, pre-procedure weight loss could be utilised to reduce post-procedure hysterectomy risk. Another possible way to minimise infection risk may be to perform a two-step embolisation, one side at a time, for high risk women. This was done for one lady in our study, but further research is required to determine if this technique effectively mitigates the infection risk.
Strengths and Limitations
The strengths of this study include the large sample size. The elliptical formula used to estimate uterine volume can be applied to both MRI and ultrasound imaging. As a result, it can be used by centres where MRI is not performed routinely for fibroid uteri. It can also be calculated easily and rapidly at the point of care, allowing for rapid assessment of a patient’s post-procedure infection risk. All 24 infection patients in this study had high-grade fever and either presented or had symptom persistence beyond 10 days post-UFE, ensuring PES cases were not incorrectly characterised as infection.
There are several limitations to this study. A clear limitation is the low number of patients in infection cohort, and therefore the obesity subgroup and the uterine volume > 1000cm3 groups. However, this was unavoidable as infection is an important, but relatively uncommon complication of UFE. Distinction between PES and infection in the absence of positive blood or high vaginal culture remains, to a certain degree, speculative. We followed 10-day cut-off as the main distinction factor given the majority of PES cases are expected to improve by this time period. As this is a retrospective study, it is conceivable that some patients may have subsequently developed infection and would not have been captured in the relatively short follow-up period. It is possible that some patients presented with infection at other institutions. However, an overwhelming majority of the treated patients were referred from within our centre’s network region and notification from treating physicians for such an important complication would be expected.
The ellipsoid formula used in this study has been widely used in previous fibroid studies and is quick and easy to calculate. However, fibroids often cause irregularity to the uterine contour, causing deviation from a perfect ellipse. Furthermore, this method has also been shown to be subject to intra-observer variability, which may lead to inaccurate measurements [13].
Interpretation
Several studies have identified a large fibroid load may increase the risk of post-UFE complications, and both cases of fatal sepsis in the literature occurred in women with large uteri [6, 14]. However, a retrospective study of 121 patients found that uterine volume > 750cm3 did not increase the risk of infection [15] and a study of 20 patients with “megauteri” (uterus measuring > 1600cm3) reported only one proven infection and no emergency hysterectomies [16]. Some studies have found trends towards an increased infection risk in patients with large dominant fibroids (23, 36, 50), but these studies do not report statistical significance. Other investigators have found no change in infection risk due to large fibroid diameter [1, 17]. A recent meta-analysis concluded that UFE is safe in patients with giant fibroids, but there was an overall significantly increased rate of major complications in this group [18], so care must be taken in diagnosing complications early. There has been controversial evidence regarding the risk of infection in patients with submucosal fibroids [19, 20]. The current study shows no significant correlation between fibroid submucosal location and infection.
A volume of 1000cm3 is equivalent to a uterus of 24 weeks gestation, which can be assessed in clinic easily using fundal height measurements. This allows for quick and easy identification of potentially high-risk patients. This increased risk should be weighed against the benefit of performing UFE prior to myomectomy as a means to shrink fibroid volume [21]. It is therefore important to consider the risk of infection post-myomectomy in patients with higher BMI, although this has not been specifically studied. Cinar et al. found that there was an increased risk of post-op fever and wound infection, but not emergency hysterectomy in obese patients [22].
A number of factors may explain the differences between the results of this study and previously reported results from retrospective studies and randomised controlled trials. Firstly, many studies included fewer patients with uterine volumes above 1000cm3, and some investigators excluded patients with > 1000cm3 from studies [23]. The current study found no significant increase in post-UFE infection in patients embolised with more than 4 vials of embolic agent. Prior studies have found increased risk of febrile complications in this cohort [24]. This could be explained by the lack of clear criteria for distinguishing true post-UFE infection from post-embolisation syndrome.