Fabiana Ferrari MD, Presenter: Nothing to Disclose

Anna Miccoli MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Francesco Arrigoni, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Eva Fascetti MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Antonio Barile MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Carlo Masciocchi MD, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Aldo Victor Giordano, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

Sergio Carducci, Abstract Co-Author: Nothing to Disclose

To evaluate the response in the uterine fibroid treatment, using UAE and MRgFUS, comparing these two techniques, in terms of Non Perfused Volume extent and reabsorption, complication, hospitalization time and clinical outcomes.

From October 2010 to December 2012, 65 patients affected by symptomatic uterine fibroids were treated in our department. Thirty-eight of them were treated using MRgFUS and 27 with UAE. Treatment was chosen according to patients age and fibroid vascularization and accessibility. We compared patients of the same age, affected by the same number of fibroids, showing similar dimensions and localization. They were controlled three times, after 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. We evaluated non perfused volume (NPV) extent, reabsorption time, clinical response and hospitalization time.

We obtained a NPV mean value of 95%, using UAE and a mean value of 91.5% using MRgFUS. We observed a reduction of the necrotic area of 70% in patients treated with UAE and of 50% in women treated with MRgFUS after 12 months from the treatment. Twenty-five out of 27 patients (92.5%), treated with UAE, presented abdominal pain and bloating, fever and vomiting; they had a mean hospitalization time of 3 days and returned to a normal life in 25 days. Only 2 out of 27 (7.5%) returned to a normal life in 10 days. Patients treated with MRgFUS had no complications, a mean hospitalization time of 1 day, returning to a normal life in 5 days, an earlier bleeding reduction and a progressive cycle regularization.

Our study demonstrates that both techniques candidate as a valid alternative to surgery. In our experience, UAE is more radical, it seems to have a shorter reabsorption time but a longer convalescence. MRgFUS is more repeatable, shows less post-treatment symptoms, a good clinical response and should be the first choice when possible.

These two techniques are a valid therapeutic solution of interventional radiology in uterine fibroid treatment in terms of symptom resolution and treatment efficiency.

Ferrari, F, Miccoli, A, Arrigoni, F, Fascetti, E, Barile, A, Masciocchi, C, Giordano, A, Carducci, S, Interventional Radiology in Uterine Fbroid Treatment: Magnetic Resonance Guided Focus Ultrasound Surgery (MRgFUS) and Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE)—Main Differences, Advantages and Therapeutic Response.  Radiological Society of North America 2014 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, - ,Chicago IL. http://archive.rsna.org/2014/14016850.html