Uterine artery embolisation versus hysterectomy for leiomyomas: primary and 2-year follow-up results of a randomised prospective clinical trial.

Abstract

To compare uterine artery embolisation (UAE) and hysterectomy for the treatment of leiomyomas at 2-year follow-up in a prospective, randomised, single-centre study. Fifty-seven symptomatic patients were randomised to UAE (n = 27) or hysterectomy (n = 30). Complications, recovery, reinterventions and satisfaction with treatment were recorded. Primary endpoint was improvement of symptoms. Analyses were performed by intent-to-treat and per protocol. Two hysterectomy patients (7%) developed major complications. Hospital discharge occurred earlier after UAE than after hysterectomy (p < 0.001). Length of sick leave was longer after hysterectomy than after UAE (p < 0.001). Twenty-two (82%) UAE patients and 28 (93%) hysterectomy patients reported overall relief of symptoms (p = 0.173). In 12/18 (67%) UAE patients menorrhagia was completely resolved or reduced. Improvement of pressure symptoms was reported significantly more by UAE patients than by hysterectomy patients (19/20 [95%] versus 18/26 [69%], respectively; p = 0.029). Five (19%) UAE patients underwent additional interventions due to worsening symptoms. Twenty-four (89%) UAE patients and 29 (97%) hysterectomy patients would have chosen treatment again (p = 0.336). UAE gave relief of symptoms (apart from menorrhagia) comparable to hysterectomy with less severe complications, but with an increased rate of secondary interventions. UAE may be the preferable treatment especially for patients with pressure symptoms.