Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Uterine Fibroids: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the AAGL Practice Committee
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review clinical and patient-reported outcomes after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of uterine fibroids. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on September 8, 2023, and requested additional data from industry sources. We included published, peer-reviewed studies of patient-centered outcomes of RFA when used for symptomatic fibroids. Abstracts and potentially relevant full-text articles were screened and data were extracted regarding study characteristics, arms, outcomes, and results, together with risk of bias assessment. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included 30 studies published in 49 articles (3 randomized controlled trials, 1 nonrandomized comparative study, and 26 single-group studies, as well as 4 publications from the TRUST Study) with variable risks of bias. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: The study populations were demographically diverse and clinically heterogeneous. Across studies, RFA treatment was associated with fibroid volume reduction of 46.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 52.1, 40.0; 11 studies) at 3 months and 65.4% (95% CI 74.7, 56.1; 10 studies) at 12 months. All studies reported a decrease in proportion of patients experiencing abnormal, heavy, or prolonged menstrual bleeding, with the most substantial improvement within the first 3 months. Meta-analyses of health-related quality of life scores demonstrated significant improvements in scores from baseline for Uterine Fibroid Symptoms and Quality of Life (53.4, 95% CI 48.2, 58.5; 19 studies), EuroQol-5 dimension (71.6, 95% CI 65.0, 78.1; 4 studies), and Symptom Severity Score (52.2, 95% CI 46.4, 58.1; 17 studies), with a peak at 6 months on the Uterine Fibroid Symptoms and Quality of Life scale (88.0, 95% CI 83.0, 92.9; 11 studies), a peak at 24 months on the EuroQol-5 dimension scale (88.3, 95% CI 86.0, 90.6; 2 studies), and a trough at 12 months for Symptom Severity Score (12.8, 95% CI 7.0, 18.6; 11 studies). Studies mostly demonstrated return to work and normal activities within 2 weeks. Reported unplanned hospitalizations were infrequent, and durations of hospital stay were generally short. Postprocedure complications were inconsistently reported but assessed overall to be infrequent. Long-term need for medical and surgical re-intervention varied. Post-RFA hysterectomy rates ranged from 2/205 (1.0%) to 15/62 (24.1%) with variable follow-up periods ranging from 45 days to 74 months. Most studies did not include patients who desired to maintain fertility; thus, reproductive data are insufficient for interpretation. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of comparative studies, and the small number of RCTs are limited by lack of blinding. Few studies had the long-term follow-up time required to draw definitive conclusions regarding the durability of symptom relief. However, despite these limitations, there is overall agreement on several important clinical measures following RFA, such as decreased fibroid volume, improved uterine bleeding, and improved quality of life. Future high-quality randomized controlled trials with standardized outcomes measures are required to better characterize the use of RFA among fibroid patients.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,069 | 0,106 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,023 | 0,027 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,016 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».