Abdominal myomectomy versus uterine fibroid embolization in the treatment of symptomatic uterine leiomyomas.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare treatment efficacy and complications of abdominal myomectomy with those of uterine fibroid embolization in women with symptomatic uterine fibroids.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

We analyzed the outcomes of 111 consecutive patients who underwent abdominal myomectomy (n = 44) or fibroid embolization (n = 67) over a 30-month period. The mean ages of the two groups were 37.7 years (range, 28-48 years) and 44.2 years (range, 31-56 years), respectively. A questionnaire and review of medical records assessed all procedure-related complications and changes in symptoms. Length of hospital stay, time until resumption of daily activities, and pain medication requirements after the procedure were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Follow-up times for the myomectomy and embolization groups were 14.6 and 14.3 months, respectively. The respective observed success rates in abdominal myomectomy and uterine fibroid embolization patients were 64% versus 92% for menorrhagia (p < 0.05), 54% versus 74% for pain (not significant), and 91% versus 76% for mass effect (p < 0.05). The complication rates were 25% (abdominal myomectomy) and 11% (uterine fibroid embolization) (p < 0.05). The respective secondary end points for the two procedures were 2.9 versus 0 days mean hospital stay, 8.7 versus 5.1 days of narcotics use, and 36 versus 8 days until resumption of normal activities. These differences were all statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Uterine fibroid embolization is a less invasive and safer treatment option in women with symptomatic leiomyomas than myomectomy. Menorrhagia may be better controlled with embolization, and myomectomy may be a better option in patients with mass effect. Both procedures were equally effective in controlling pain.