Uterine Myomas: Recent Advances in their Treatment
Georgios Androutsopoulos* and Georgios Decavalas
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Patras, Greece
Submission: June 27, 2016; Published: June 28, 2016
*Corresponding author: Georgios Androutsopoulos, Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Patras, Medical School, Rion 26504, Greece, Tel: +306974088092; Email: androutsopoulos@upatras.gr; androutsopoulosgeorgios@hotmail.com
How to cite this article: Georgios A, Georgios D. Uterine Myomas: Recent Advances in their Treatment. J Gynecol Women’s Health. 2016; 1(2): 555560. DOI: 10.19080/JGWH.2016.01.555560
Editorial
Nowadays, uterine myomas represent a very common clinical entity. Approximately 20%-40% of the women in the reproductive age have uterine myomas [1,2]. However, in menopause there is a significant decrease in the incidence of uterine myomas [2,3]. A lot of patients with uterine myomas have no symptoms, because these tumors are usually asymptomatic [1]. Nevertheless, patients with uterine myomas may have: abnormal uterine bleeding, pelvic pain, pressure complaints, infertility and pregnancy-related complications [1,3,4].
There are many treatment protocols for patients with uterine myomas [5-7]. The most popular among them, is the surgical intervention (myomectomy, hysterectomy) with preoperative preparation with GnRH analogues. In sharp contrast, the non-surgical techniques (uterine artery embolization, focused ultrasound surgery) are significantly less popular, although they have promising results in carefully selected patients [1,5,8-15]. To begin with, the role of myomectomy in nulliparous patients with uterine myomas is well established. Myomectomy is the treatment of choice especially in patients who desire fertility preservation [4,9,13,16]. The main surgical technique in myomectomy is the complete removal of all visible uterine myomas and the appropriate repair of uterine defects [4,16].
There are various degrees of difficulty regarding the entire surgical procedure. Moreover, there is a wide range of perioperative complications including: bleeding, infection and trauma in adjacent organs. Sometimes we cannot avoid hysterectomy, especially in cases with large uterine myomas and severe intraoperative bleeding [4]. It is interesting to note, that the preoperative preparation with GnRH analogues for 3 to 4 months, offers significant benefits in patients with large uterine myomas. This is mainly because GnRH analogues reduce myomas size, total uterine volume and intraoperative blood loss [1,5,6,8,10]. In this light, myomectomy becomes an easier, safer and less time consuming procedure [8,10,13].
The myomectomy can be performed with laparotomy, mini laparotomy, laparoscopy and hysteroscopy [4-6,15]. Among them, laparotomy and mini laparotomy are the most common surgical approaches. In contrast, laparoscopy is significantly more difficult and time consuming and requires special surgical skills in suturing [4,17-19]. Likewise, hysteroscopy is the treatment of choice for submucosal uterine myomas [1,4]. On the other hand, hysterectomy remains the treatment of choice especially in symptomatic perimenopausal women with multiple and large uterine myomas and completed childbearing [1,5,16]. It is a more difficult operation and associated with a big variety of complications including: bleeding, infection and trauma in adjacent organs [1,4].
The hysterectomy can be performed with laparotomy, mini laparotomy and laparoscopy [4-6,15]. However, laparotomy and mini laparotomy are the most common surgical approaches [4,17-19]. Recent years, uterine artery embolization (UAE) is a widely acceptable non-surgical technique in selected patients with uterine myomas [7]. It is a minimal invasive procedure that uses transcutaneous common femoral artery approach to reduce uterine blood supply [7,11]. As a result, UAE causes irreversible ischemia and leads to necrosis and shrinkage of uterine myomas [5-7,11,20]. It is based on well-established techniques for treating pelvic bleeding and it was first described in 1976 in patients with gynecological malignancies and severe uterine bleeding [21,22]. In current clinical practice, UAE represents an acceptable alternative to hysterectomy and myomectomy [5-7,21,23].
Patients who wish to preserve their uterus and avoid surgical operation and patients who refuse blood transfusion for health concerns or religious reasons, are eligible for UAE [4,5,23-27]. Likewise, patients with relevant co-morbidities (obesity, coronary artery disease) and increased risk for perioperative complications, are also candidates for UAE [5,6,21]. It is worth noting, that UAE results in shorter operative time, less intraoperative blood loss and less postoperative pain compared with surgical intervention. Similarly, there is an essential decrease in hospital stay and a quicker recovery and return to normal activities [24,26,28-32]. Moreover, there is a substantial improvement in general symptoms and in the quality of life [4,21,23,25,31].
The effect of UAE on ovarian reserve is not well-established [33]. However, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) levels have no significant differences between patients treated with UAE and patients underwent to hysterectomy [33]. A future pregnancy is feasible in patients treated with UAE [34,35]. However, there is an increased risk for obstetric complications (miscarriage, abnormal placentation, preterm labor, malpresentation and postpartum hemorrhage) [34-36]. In this case, it is recommended a close monitoring of the placental status [34]. Apart from that, magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) is another non-surgical technique in selected patients with uterine myomas. It is a hybrid technique and combines the capabilities of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the therapeutic potential of focused ultrasound (FUS) [5,6,37,38]. More specifically, MRg- FUS uses high intensity ultrasound waves and direct them into uterine myomas. In this way, the ultrasound energy penetrates soft tissue and produces well defined regions of protein denaturation, irreversible cell damage and coagulative necrosis [4,37,39].
It is interesting to see, that MRgFUS results in shorter operative time, and less postoperative pain compared with standard surgical intervention. Likewise, there is an essential decrease in hospital stay and a quicker recovery and return to daily activities [5,6,37,40,41]. Although pregnancy is possible in patients treated with MRgFUS, it is recommended a very careful ultrasound evaluation of the placental site and placental status to ensure appropriate care [42].
In conclusion, the surgical intervention remains the treatment of choice in patients with uterine myomas [4,9,13,16]. The non-surgical techniques (uterine artery embolization, focused ultrasound surgery) have shown promising results in carefully selected patients with uterine myomas, minimizing the need for the standard surgical operation [5-7]. However, in nulliparous patients and in patients who want to preserve future childbearing capability, myomectomy remains the treatment of choice [5-7,9].
References
- Wallach E, Vlahos N (2004) Uterine myomas: an overview of development, clinical features, and management. Obstet Gynecol 104(2): 393-406.
- Ryan G, Syrop C, Van Voorhis B (2005) Role, epidemiology, and natural history of benign uterine mass lesions. Clin Obstet Gynecol 48(2): 312- 324.
- Parker W (2007) Etiology, symptomatology, and diagnosis of uterine myomas. Fertil Steril 87(4): 725-736.
- ACOG (2008) ACOG practice bulletin. Alternatives to hysterectomy in the management of leiomyomas. Obstet Gynecol 112(2 Pt 1): 387-400.
- Androutsopoulos G (2012) How effective are current treatment strategies, in patients with uterine myomas? J Community Med Health Edu 2(6): e107.
- Androutsopoulos G, Decavalas G (2014) Management of uterine myomas: a critical update. Int J Transl Commun Med 2(1): 1-3.
- Androutsopoulos G, Karnabatidis D, Michail G, Decavalas G (2015) Uterine artery embolization as an alternative to hysterectomy, in patients with uterine myomas. Approaches to hysterectomy: InTech, pp. 35-47.
- Lethaby A, Vollenhoven B, Sowter M (2002) Efficacy of pre-operative gonadotrophin hormone releasing analogues for women with uterine fibroids undergoing hysterectomy or myomectomy: a systematic review. BJOG 109(10): 1097-1108.
- Olive D, Lindheim S, Pritts E (2004) Non-surgical management of leiomyoma: impact on fertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 16(3): 239- 243.
- Sankaran S, Manyonda I (2008) Medical management of fibroids. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 22(4): 655-676.
- Ravina J, Herbreteau D, Ciraru-Vigneron N, Bouret J, Houdart E, et al. (1995) Arterial embolisation to treat uterine myomata. Lancet 346(8976): 671-672.
- Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Silfen SL, Schaffer N, Evans D (1991) Laparoscopic myomectomy. Int J Fertil 36(5): 275-280.
- Glasser MH (2005) Minilaparotomy myomectomy: a minimally invasive alternative for the large fibroid uterus. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12(3): 275-283.
- Falcone T, Parker WH (2013) Surgical management of leiomyomas for fertility or uterine preservation. Obstet Gynecol 121(4): 856-868.
- Zygouris D, Androutsopoulos G, Grigoriadis C, Terzakis E (2013) The role of mini laparotomy in patients with uterine myomas. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 40(1): 137-140.
- Luciano A (2009) Myomectomy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 52(3): 362-371.
- Friedmann W, Maier RF, Luttkus A, Schafer AP, Dudenhausen JW (1996) Uterine rupture after laparoscopic myomectomy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 75(7): 683-684.
- Dubuisson J, Chavet X, Chapron C, Gregorakis S, Morice P (1995) Uterine rupture during pregnancy after laparoscopic myomectomy. Hum Reprod 10(6): 1475-1477.
- Cagnacci A, Pirillo D, Malmusi S, Arangino S, Alessandrini C, et al. (2003) Early outcome of myomectomy by laparotomy, minilaparotomy and laparoscopically assisted minilaparotomy. A randomized prospective study. Hum Reprod 18(12): 2590-2594.
- Colgan T, Pron G, Mocarski E, Bennett J, Asch M, et al. (2003) Pathologic features of uteri and leiomyomas following uterine artery embolization for leiomyomas. Am J Surg Pathol 27(2): 167-177.
- Stokes L, Wallace M, Godwin R, Kundu S, Cardella J (2010) Quality improvement guidelines for uterine artery embolization for symptomatic leiomyomas. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21(8): 1153-1163.
- Brault B, Marsault C, Moulin JD, Salmon R, Merland JJ (1976) Arterial embolization in the treatment of metrorrhagia of tumoral origin. La Nouvelle presse medicale 5(16): 1043-1046.
- Goodwin S, Spies J, Worthington-Kirsch R, Peterson E, Pron G, et al.(2008) Uterine artery embolization for treatment of leiomyomata: long-term outcomes from the FIBROID Registry. Obstet Gynecol 111(1): 22-33.
- Gupta J, Sinha A, Lumsden M, Hickey M (2006) Uterine artery embolization for symptomatic uterine fibroids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 25(1): CD005073.
- Gonsalves C (2008) Uterine artery embolization for treatment of symptomatic fibroids. Semin Intervent Radiol 25(4): 369-377.
- Bradley L (2009) Uterine fibroid embolization: a viable alternative to hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201(2): 127-135.
- Goodwin S, Bonilla S, Sacks D, Reed R, Spies J, et al. (2003) Reporting standards for uterine artery embolization for the treatment of uterine leiomyomata. J Vasc Interv Radiol 14(9 Pt 2): S467-476.
- van der Kooij S, Bipat S, Hehenkamp W, Ankum W, Reekers J (2011) Uterine artery embolization versus surgery in the treatment of symptomatic fibroids: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(4): 317.e1-18.
- Hehenkamp W, Volkers N, Donderwinkel P, de Blok S, Birnie E, et al. (2005) Uterine artery embolization versus hysterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids (EMMY trial): peri- and postprocedural results from a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(5): 1618-1629.
- Hehenkamp WJ, Volkers NA, Birnie E, Reekers J, Ankum WM (2006) Pain and return to daily activities after uterine artery embolization and hysterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: results from the randomized EMMY trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29(2): 179-187.
- Edwards R, Moss J, Lumsden M, Wu O, Murray L, et al. (2007) Uterineartery embolization versus surgery for symptomatic uterine fibroids. N Engl J Med 356(4): 360-370.
- Pinto I, Chimeno P, Romo A, Paul L, Haya J, et al. (2003) Uterine fibroids: uterine artery embolization versus abdominal hysterectomy for treatment--a prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical trial. Radiology 226(2): 425-431.
- van der Kooij S, Ankum W, Hehenkamp W (2012) Review of nonsurgical/minimally invasive treatments for uterine fibroids. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 24(6): 368-375.
- Pron G, Mocarski E, Bennett J, Vilos G, Common A, et al. (2005) Pregnancy after uterine artery embolization for leiomyomata: the Ontario multicenter trial. Obstet Gynecol 105(1): 67-76.
- Walker W, McDowell S (2006) Pregnancy after uterine artery embolization for leiomyomata: a series of 56 completed pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 195(5): 1266-1271.
- Goldberg J, Pereira L, Berghella V, Diamond J, Darai E, et al. (2004) Pregnancy outcomes after treatment for fibromyomata: uterine artery embolization versus laparoscopic myomectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191(1): 18-21.
- Hesley G, Gorny K, Henrichsen T, Woodrum D, Brown D (2008) A clinical review of focused ultrasound ablation with magnetic resonance guidance: an option for treating uterine fibroids. Ultrasound Q 24(2): 131-139.
- Hesley G, Gorny K, Woodrum D (2013) MR-guided focused ultrasound for the treatment of uterine fibroids. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 36(1): 5-13.
- Hindley J, Gedroyc WM, Regan L, Stewart E, Tempany C, et al. (2004) MRI guidance of focused ultrasound therapy of uterine fibroids: early results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183(6): 1713-1719.
- Stewart E, Rabinovici J, Tempany C, Inbar Y, Regan L, et al. (2006) Clinical outcomes of focused ultrasound surgery for the treatment of uterine fibroids. Fertil Steril 85(1): 22-29.
- Trumm C, Stahl R, Clevert D, Herzog P, Mindjuk I, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: impact of technology advancement on ablation volumes in 115 patients. Invest Radiol 48(6): 359-365.
- Rabinovici J, David M, Fukunishi H, Morita Y, Gostout B, et al. (2010) Pregnancy outcome after magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) for conservative treatment of uterine fibroids. Fertil Steril 93(1): 199-209.