Laparoscopic multi-bipolar radiofrequency ablation of fibroids: impact on quality of life
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of multi-bipolar radiofrequency ablation compared to standard laparoscopic myomectomy in treating uterine fibroids, focusing on women's quality of life. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: La Conception Hospital, APHM-Marseille, France. PATIENTS: 50 women with symptomatic fibroids treated between December 2021 and December 2023. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation or conventional laparoscopic myomectomy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After excluding patients who did not complete the preoperative quality-of-life questionnaire, 34 underwent myomectomy and 16 radiofrequency ablation. At 3 months, no significant differences were observed in HRQOL improvement (9.2 ± 34.3 vs 24.2 ± 28.2, p = 0.14), SSS (- 27.5 ± 31.5 vs - 23.3 ± 33, p = 0.66), or FSFI (0.9 ± 14.7 vs - 1.5 ± 10.8, p = 0.40). The 6-month outcomes also showed no significant difference. Baseline fibroid-specific quality of life was significantly and negatively associated with improvement (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both procedures improved quality of life and reduced fibroid-related symptoms at 3 and 6 months, with no significant difference. Myolysis showed fewer peri- and postoperative complications, suggesting a better safety profile and potential as a conservative treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ethics committee of Aix Marseille University approved this study on April 18, 2024, under the reference number 2024-04-18-08.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Laparoscopic multi-bipolar radiofrequency ablation of fibroids: impact on quality of life
- Date Crossref
- 28/06/2025
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.