Abstract:Background: Uterine fibroids are the most common tumour in women of reproductive age and are associated with heavy menstrual bleeding, abdominal discomfort, subfertility and reduced quality of life. For women wishing to retain their uterus and who do not respond to medical treatment, myomectomy and uterine artery embolisation are therapeutic options. Objectives: We examined the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of uterine artery embolisation compared with myomectomy in the treatment of symptomatic fibroids. Design: A multicentre, open, randomised trial with a parallel economic evaluation. Setting: Twenty-nine UK hospitals. Participants: Premenopausal women who had symptomatic uterine fibroids amenable to myomectomy or uterine artery embolisation were recruited. Women were excluded if they had significant adenomyosis, any malignancy or pelvic inflammatory disease or if they had already had a previous open myomectomy or uterine artery embolisation. Interventions: Participants were randomised to myomectomy or embolisation in a 1 : 1 ratio using a minimisation algorithm. Myomectomy could be open abdominal, laparoscopic or hysteroscopic. Embolisation of the uterine arteries was performed under fluoroscopic guidance. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Uterine Fibroid Symptom Quality of Life questionnaire (with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and a higher score indicating better quality of life) at 2 years, adjusted for baseline score. The economic evaluation estimated quality-adjusted life-years (derived from EuroQol-5 Dimensions, three-level version, and costs from the NHS perspective). Results: A total of 254 women were randomised - 127 to myomectomy (105 underwent myomectomy) and 127 to uterine artery embolisation (98 underwent embolisation). Information on the primary outcome at 2 years was available for 81% (n = 206) of women. Primary outcome scores at 2 years were 84.6 (standard deviation 21.5) in the myomectomy group and 80.0 (standard deviation 22.0) in the uterine artery embolisation group (intention-to-treat complete-case analysis mean adjusted difference 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 14.1, p = 0.01; mean adjusted difference using multiple imputation for missing responses 6.5, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 11.9). The mean difference in the primary outcome at the 4-year follow-up time point was 5.0 (95% CI -1.4 to 11.5; p = 0.13) in favour of myomectomy. Perioperative and postoperative complications from all initial procedures occurred in similar percentages of women in both groups (29% in the myomectomy group vs. 24% in the UAE group). Twelve women in the uterine embolisation group and six women in the myomectomy group reported pregnancies over 4 years, resulting in seven and five live births, respectively (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 1.28). Over a 2-year time horizon, uterine artery embolisation was associated with higher costs than myomectomy (mean cost £7958, 95% confidence interval £6304 to £9612, vs. mean cost £7314, 95% confidence interval £5854 to £8773), but with fewer quality-adjusted life-years gained (0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.78, vs. 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.87). The differences in costs (difference £645, 95% confidence interval -£1381 to £2580) and quality-adjusted life-years (difference -0.09, 95% confidence interval -0.11 to -0.04) were small. Similar results were observed over the 4-year time horizon. At a threshold of willingness to pay for a gain of 1 QALY of £20,000, the probability of myomectomy being cost-effective is 98% at 2 years and 96% at 4 years. Limitations: There were a substantial number of women who were not recruited because of their preference for a particular treatment option. Conclusions: Among women with symptomatic uterine fibroids, myomectomy resulted in greater improvement in quality of life than did uterine artery embolisation. The differences in costs and quality-adjusted life-years are very small. Future research should involve women who are desiring pregnancy. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN70772394. Funding: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme, and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 22. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Surgical outcomes after uterine artery occlusion at the time of myomectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Uterine artery embolization versus myomectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical impact of bilateral transient occlusion of uterine and utero-ovarian arteries during laparoscopic myomectomy

Systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence in uterine artery embolization vs myomectomy for symptomatic uterine fibroids

Laparoscopic Myomectomy with Temporary Bilateral Uterine Artery and Utero-Ovarian Vessels Occlusion Compared with Traditional Surgery for Uterine Fibroids: Blood Loss and Recurrence

Laparoscopic Myomectomy with Temporary Bilateral Uterine Artery Occlusion Compared with Traditional Surgery for Uterine Myomas: Blood Loss and Recurrence

Perioperative Interventions to Minimize Blood Loss at the Time of Hysterectomy for Uterine Leiomyomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Uterine artery embolisation versus myomectomy for the management of women with uterine leiomyomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Minimizing blood loss in laparoscopic myomectomy with temporary occlusion of the hypogastric artery

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Uterine Artery Embolization Vs. Surgery for Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids.

Perioperative vaginal misoprostol versus intraoperative pericervical hemostatic tourniquet outcome during abdominal myomectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The great debate: Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus laparotomic myomectomy. A meta-analysis to critically evaluate current evidence and look over the horizon

Uterine Artery Embolization Versus Surgery for Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids: a Randomized Controlled Trial and a Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Effects on heavy menstrual bleeding and pregnancy of uterine artery embolization (UAE) or myomectomy for women with uterine fibroids wishing to avoid hysterectomy: The FEMME randomized controlled trial

A Systematic Review of Minimally Invasive Treatments for Uterine Fibroid-Related Bleeding

Impact of uterine artery embolization on ovarian function and pregnancy outcome after uterine-fibroids treatment: A prospective study

Combining the uterine depletion procedure and myomectomy may be useful for treating symptomatic fibroids

Comparing perioperative vaginal misoprostol with intraoperative pericervical hemostatic tourniquet in reducing blood loss during abdominal myomectomy: A randomized controlled trial

Uterine Artery Embolization for Pedunculated Subserosal Fibroids: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ulipristal acetate vs gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists prior to laparoscopic myomectomy (MYOMEX trial): Short-term results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial

Uterine artery embolisation versus myomectomy for premenopausal women with uterine fibroids wishing to avoid hysterectomy: the FEMME RCT