User login
Key clinical point: Rates of reintervention were similar, and the risk for major adverse events was lower with thermal ablative methods vs myomectomy for treating uterine fibroids (UF), suggesting that thermal ablative methods were not inferior to myomectomy for treating UFs.
Major finding: The reintervention rate was not significantly different between thermal ablative treatment and myomectomy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs; P = .094) and observational studies (P = .16). The risk for major adverse events was significantly lower with thermal ablative methods (risk ratio, 0.111; 95% CI, 0.070-0.175). The pregnancy rate was not significantly different between the groups (P = .796).
Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 10 observational studies and 3 RCTs including 4,205 patients who underwent thermal ablative methods or myomectomy for the treatment of UFs.
Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.
Source: Liang D et al. Int J Hyperthermia. 2021 Nov 1. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1996644.
Key clinical point: Rates of reintervention were similar, and the risk for major adverse events was lower with thermal ablative methods vs myomectomy for treating uterine fibroids (UF), suggesting that thermal ablative methods were not inferior to myomectomy for treating UFs.
Major finding: The reintervention rate was not significantly different between thermal ablative treatment and myomectomy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs; P = .094) and observational studies (P = .16). The risk for major adverse events was significantly lower with thermal ablative methods (risk ratio, 0.111; 95% CI, 0.070-0.175). The pregnancy rate was not significantly different between the groups (P = .796).
Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 10 observational studies and 3 RCTs including 4,205 patients who underwent thermal ablative methods or myomectomy for the treatment of UFs.
Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.
Source: Liang D et al. Int J Hyperthermia. 2021 Nov 1. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1996644.
Key clinical point: Rates of reintervention were similar, and the risk for major adverse events was lower with thermal ablative methods vs myomectomy for treating uterine fibroids (UF), suggesting that thermal ablative methods were not inferior to myomectomy for treating UFs.
Major finding: The reintervention rate was not significantly different between thermal ablative treatment and myomectomy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs; P = .094) and observational studies (P = .16). The risk for major adverse events was significantly lower with thermal ablative methods (risk ratio, 0.111; 95% CI, 0.070-0.175). The pregnancy rate was not significantly different between the groups (P = .796).
Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of 10 observational studies and 3 RCTs including 4,205 patients who underwent thermal ablative methods or myomectomy for the treatment of UFs.
Disclosures: This study did not report any source of funding. The authors declared no conflict of interests.
Source: Liang D et al. Int J Hyperthermia. 2021 Nov 1. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1996644.