Place de l'embolisation dans le traitement des fibromes

Uterine artery embolization using non spherical PVA particles or calibrated tris-acryl microspheres above 500 μm is effective to treat menorrhagia, bulk-related symptoms and pelvic pain in more than 90% of cases in the short-term. In the long-term, embolization is effective in 75% of cases at 5-7 years. At 6 months, uterine volume reduction and dominant fibroid volume reduction varies between 30-60% and 50-80% respectively. During hospital stay, the complication rate is 3%. Secondary hysterectomy for complication is less than 2% at 3 months. Definitive amenorrhea is reported in less than 5% of cases in women of less than 45 years of age. No significant impact of embolization on hormonal function has been reported in women less than 45 years with normal baseline function. Secondary hysterectomy for clinical failure or recurrence is reported in 14-28% of cases at 5 years. Non-spherical PVA particles are associated with more microcatheter occlusion than tris-acryl microspheres. No difference between PVA particles and tris-acryl microspheres was found in terms of post-embolization pain or analgesic doses. PVA microspheres (Contour SE et Bead Block) are associated with lower clinical success and lower fibroid devascularization using MRI than tris-acryl microspheres. No difference between PVA particles and tris-acryl microspheres was found in terms of clinical efficacy, uterine volume reduction and complication rate. Randomized studies comparing embolization to hysterectomy demonstrate that reinterventions are more frequently performed after embolization. Secondary hysterectomy is performed in 13 to 24% of cases at 2 years and in up to 28% of cases at 5 years. Hospital stay, duration of recovery and time off work are shorter after embolization compared to hysterectomy. Embolization is cheaper than hysterectomy at 12 and 24 months even taking into consideration the additional costs of imaging and reinterventions. Randomized studies comparing embolization to myomectomy demonstrate that in the short- and mid-term there is no difference in terms of control of menorrhagia and bulk-related symptoms. Uterine volume reduction and quality of life were not different at 6 months. Periprocedural and 30-day complication rates are not different. At 6 months, the rate of complications is higher after myomectomy. Reinterventions are more frequent after embolization compared to myomectomy. Hospital stay, duration of recovery and time off work are shorter after embolization compared to myomectomy. Embolization should be considered with caution in pregnancy-seeking women since there is still a lack of good quality data available in the specific group of patients. FSH level is more frequently elevated after embolization compared to myomectomy. Pregnancy rate and term pregnancy rate are higher after myomectomy compared to embolization. Spontaneous abortion is more frequent after embolization than after myomectomy. There is no difference between embolization and myomectomy for the rates of pre-term delivery, cesarean section, post-partum hemorrhage, pre-eclampsia or intra-uterine growth retardation. Embolization performed before myomectomy (preoperative or combined procedures) can be discussed for an individual patient but there is not enough data to support its routine use.