9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Incidence and risk factors for surgical intervention after uterine artery embolization

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To determine the incidence and risk factors for surgical intervention after uterine artery embolization for symptomatic uterine fibroids. Electronic medical records of all patients who underwent uterine artery embolization for symptomatic uterine leiomyomata were reviewed. Logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for any surgical intervention and for hysterectomy alone after uterine artery embolization. Uterine artery embolization was performed in 454 patients during the study period, with a median follow-up time (range) of 14 (0-128) months. Overall, 99 patients (22%) underwent any surgical intervention after uterine artery embolization in the operating room. Risk factors for any surgical intervention included younger age (P < .003), bleeding as an indication for uterine artery embolization (P < .01), presence of significant collateral ovarian vessel contribution to the uterus (P < .01), or use of 355-500 mum particles (P < .008). Patients undergoing uterine artery embolization have a 22% risk for requiring additional surgical intervention, but overall uterine artery embolization is an effective minimally invasive option.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
          American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
          Elsevier BV
          00029378
          December 2008
          December 2008
          : 199
          : 6
          : 671.e1-671.e6
          Article
          10.1016/j.ajog.2008.07.060
          18986639
          dc82b679-4883-4d86-a50c-4a2fae57f3e5
          © 2008

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article