Abstract
Purpose
To evaluate the technical success of total fibroid clearance at open myomectomy for massive and/or multiple symptomatic fibroids using MR imaging (MRI) as the imaging modality.
Methods
The study group comprised 27 women [mean age 37.4 ± 6.9 years (range 27–53)] who underwent open myomectomy for the treatment of massive/multiple symptomatic fibroids at our institution between January 2009 and April 2010. Myomectomy was performed with the intention of achieving complete fibroid clearance. Pre- and postmyomectomy MRI was performed to assess changes in uterine volume and fibroid burden. Periprocedural data (including blood loss and complications) and relief of clinical symptoms at follow-up were also recorded.
Results
The mean time to MRI and clinical follow-up was 10 months (range 6–15 months). The mean uterine volume premyomectomy was 795 ± 580 cc and postmyomectomy was 123 ± 70 cc (p < 0.001). The mean percentage reduction in uterine volume was 80.3 % (range 43.0–98.1 %). Of the 10/27 (37.0 %) women with residual fibroids at follow-up: 7 patients had fibroids measuring up to 1 cc in volume, 3 patients had fibroids measuring up to 6 cc. Postoperative adnexal seromas were observed in 6/27 (22.2 %) patients. The clinical success rates of myomectomy amongst the 22/27 (81 %) responders were: 73 % for menorrhagia, 64 % for pain, and 36–64 % for mass-related symptoms.
Conclusions
Using MRI, we have confirmed that open myomectomy can achieve total or near-total fibroid clearance in the majority of patients with massive and/or multiple fibroids.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
van der Kooij SM, Hehenkamp WJ, Volkers NA et al (2010) Uterine artery embolization vs hysterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: 5-year outcome from the randomized EMMY trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:105.e1-13
Smeets AJ, Nijenhuis RJ, van Rooij WJ et al (2010) Uterine artery embolization in patients with a large fibroid burden: long-term clinical and MR follow-up. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:943–948
Berkane N, Moutafoff-Borie C (2010) Impact of previous uterine artery embolization on fertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 22:242–247
Taylor A, Sharma M, Tsirkas P et al (2005) Surgical and radiological management of uterine fibroids—a UK survey of current consultant practice. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 84:478–482
Tulandi T, Murray C, Guralnick M (1993) Adhesion formation and reproductive outcome after myomectomy and second look laparoscopy. Obstet Gynecol 82:213–215
Thompson LB, Reed SD, McCrummen BK et al (2006) Leiomyoma characteristics and risk of subsequent surgery after myomectomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 95:138–143
Tsuji S, Takahashi K, Imaoka I et al (2006) MRI evaluation of the uterine structure after myomectomy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 61:106–110
Manyonda IT, Bratby M, Horst JS et al (2011) Uterine artery embolization versus myomectomy: impact on quality of life-results of the FUME (Fibroids of the Uterus: Myomectomy versus Embolization) trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Jul 20 [Epub ahead of print]
Peddada SD, Laughlin SK, Miner K et al (2008) Growth of uterine leiomyomata among premenopausal black and white women. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:19887–19892
Mukhopadhaya N, De Silva C, Manyonda IT (2008) Conventional myomectomy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 22:677–705
Byrne H, Miskry T, Gomez CM (2009) Using vasopressin for myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol 114:169–170
Parthipun AA, Taylor J, Manyonda I et al (2010) Does size really matter? Analysis of the effect of large fibroids and uterine volumes on complication rates of uterine artery embolisation. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:955–959
Razavi MK, Hwang G, Jahed A et al (2003) Abdominal myomectomy versus uterine fibroid embolization in the treatment of symptomatic uterine leiomyomas. Am J Roentgenol 180:1571–1575
Schüring AN, Garcia-Rocha GJ, Schlösser HW et al (2010) Perioperative complications in conventional and microsurgical abdominal myomectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet Aug 1 [Epub ahead of print]
LaMorte AI, Lalwani S, Diamond MP (1993) Morbidity associated with abdominal myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol 82:897–900
Hutchins FL Jr (1995) Abdominal myomectomy as a treatment for symptomatic uterine fibroids. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 22:781–789
Fauconnier A, Chapron C, Babaki-Fard K, Dubuisson JB (2000) Recurrence of leiomyomata after myomectomy. Hum Reprod Update 6:595–602
Subramanian S, Clark MA, Isaacson K (2001) Outcome and resource use associated with myomectomy. Obstet Gynecol 98:583–587
Iverson RE Jr, Chelmow D, Strohbehn K et al (1996) Relative morbidity of abdominal hysterectomy and myomectomy for management of uterine leiomyomas. Obstet Gynecol 88:415–419
Farhi J, Ashkenazi J, Feldberg D et al (1995) Effect of uterine leiomyomata on the results of in vitro fertilization treatment. Hum Reprod 10:2576–2578
Sinha R, Hegde A, Mahajan C et al (2008) Laparoscopic myomectomy: do size, number, and location of the myomas form limiting factors for laparoscopic myomectomy? J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:292–300
Tinelli A, Malvasi A, Hudelist G et al (2010) Laparoscopic intracapsular myomectomy: comparison of single versus multiple fibroids removal. An institutional experience. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 20:705–771
Kirby JM, Burrows D, Haider E et al (2011) Utility of MRI before and after uterine fibroid embolization: why to do it and what to look for. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 34:705–716
Landi S, Zaccoletti R, Ferrari L et al (2001) Laparoscopic myomectomy: technique, complications, and ultrasound scan evaluations. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 8:231–240
Conflict of interest
We declare that we have no conflicts of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wijesekera, N.T., Mauri, G., Gupta, S. et al. MR imaging evaluation of fibroid clearance following open myomectomy for massive/multiple symptomatic fibroids. Arch Gynecol Obstet 286, 1165–1171 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2404-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2404-5