Is High-intensity Focused Ultrasound Effective for the Treatment of Adenomyosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
41
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2020
Editora
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Indexadores
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Autor de Grupo de pesquisa
Editores
Coordenadores
Organizadores
Citação
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, v.27, n.2, p.332-343, 2020
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Study Objective: To systematically review the literature regarding the efficacy of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in reducing adenomyotic lesions, patients' pain and bleeding symptoms, and the impact on patients' quality of life. Data Source: A search was performed through PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Methods of Study Selection: All available studies published in the English language in the last 10 years that evaluated the effects of HIFU for adenomyosis. Tabulation, Integration, and Results: A systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed on data from homogeneous studies. Pooled results from the meta-analysis showed that after HIFU treatment for adenomyosis, a large effect was observed in reducing the uterine volume at 12 months (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.85), a significant reduction in dysmenorrhea at 3 months (SMD = 1.83) and 12 months (SMD = 2.37), and a significant improvement in quality of life at 6 months (SMD = 3.0) and 12 months (SMD = 2.75). Adverse reactions after HIFU were reported in 55.9% of patients. Conclusion: This review suggests a potential benefit for HIFU in the treatment of adenomyosis-related symptoms; however, findings of the meta-analysis were based on fewer, nonuniform studies, which did not equally account for each specific symptom/parameter across the board. Results showed there appears to be a potential of HIFU in the treatment of adenomyosis-related symptoms. To date, there are no comparative and randomized clinical trials comparing the HIFU technique with other conservative treatment options. As yet, there are insufficient data regarding fertility and pregnancy outcomes.
Palavras-chave
High-intensity focused ultrasound, Adenomyosis, Systematic review
Referências
  1. Abbott JA, 2017, BEST PRACT RES CL OB, V40, P68, DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.09.006
  2. Bohlmann MK, 2014, GEBURTSH FRAUENHEILK, V74, P139, DOI 10.1055/s-0033-1360311
  3. Cheung VYT, 2018, BEST PRACT RES CL OB, V46, P74, DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2017.09.002
  4. Coyne KS, 2017, CURR MED RES OPIN, V33, P193, DOI 10.1080/03007995.2016.1248382
  5. Di Donato N, 2014, EUR J OBSTET GYN R B, V181, P289, DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.08.016
  6. Dueholm M, 2018, BEST PRACT RES CL OB, V51, P119, DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.01.016
  7. Dueholm M, 2017, ACTA OBSTET GYN SCAN, V96, P715, DOI 10.1111/aogs.13158
  8. Faraone Stephen V, 2008, P T, V33, P700
  9. Farquhar C, 2006, BEST PRACT RES CL OB, V20, P603, DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.012
  10. Feng YJ, 2017, ULTRASON SONOCHEM, V36, P139, DOI 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.11.022
  11. Gordts S, 2018, FERTIL STERIL, V109, P380, DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.006
  12. Hozo Stela Pudar, 2005, BMC Med Res Methodol, V5, P13, DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-5-13
  13. Lee JS, 2017, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V124, P18, DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.14739
  14. Lee JS, 2015, ULTRASON SONOCHEM, V27, P682, DOI 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2015.05.033
  15. Liu XF, 2017, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V124, P40, DOI 10.1111/1471-0528.14746
  16. Liu X, 2016, MEDICINE, V95, DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000002443
  17. Long L, 2015, INT J CLIN EXP MED, V8, P11701
  18. Luo DH, 2018, STAT METHODS MED RES, V27, P1785, DOI 10.1177/0962280216669183
  19. Moher D, 2015, SYST REV, V4, DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
  20. Naftalin J, 2014, HUM REPROD, V29, P473, DOI 10.1093/humrep/det451
  21. Ozdegirmenci O, 2011, FERTIL STERIL, V95, P497, DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.009
  22. Park J, 2016, J KOREAN MED SCI, V31, P1279, DOI 10.3346/jkms.2016.31.8.1279
  23. PRICE DD, 1983, PAIN, V17, P45, DOI 10.1016/0304-3959(83)90126-4
  24. Rocha TP, 2018, REPROD SCI, V25, P480, DOI 10.1177/1933719118756754
  25. Rohatgi A, 2011, WEBPLOTDIGITIZER
  26. Sacks David, 2003, J Vasc Interv Radiol, V14, pS199
  27. Shui L, 2015, ULTRASON SONOCHEM, V27, P677, DOI 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2015.05.024
  28. Vannuccini Silvia, 2019, F1000Res, V8, DOI 10.12688/f1000research.17242.1
  29. Wang W, 2009, ACAD RADIOL, V16, P1416, DOI 10.1016/j.acra.2009.06.005
  30. Whiting Penny, 2003, BMC Med Res Methodol, V3, P25, DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-3-25
  31. Zhang X, 2014, EUR J RADIOL, V83, P1607, DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.008
  32. Zhang X, 2014, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V124, P207, DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.08.022
  33. Zhou M, 2011, FERTIL STERIL, V95, P900, DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.020