News

Radiofrequency Ablation: A Possible Game Changer for Uterine Fibroids

View on the News

Jury Is Still Out on Radiofrequency Ablation

Although Dr. Chudnoff and his coauthors’ prospective, single-arm industry study of Acessa use of targeted radiofrequency ablation for uterine fibroids – which reports on only its first 12 months of follow-up – shows results that are promising, I would caution readers before adopting the technology wholeheartedly.



Dr.. Patrick J. Woodman

We have seen similar impressive results with targeted vascular embolization of uterine fibroids. The decision to enthusiastically adopt uterine artery embolization lined a good number of radiologists’ pockets, while leaving unhappy gynecologists to deal with the inevitable complications of pain and bleeding.

Equally concerning are the authors’ claims that "the risk is so low." Although I expect that the "intra-abdominal" ultrasound guidance to evolve so that it could be done transvaginally, the approach still resulted in a 1.5% chance of "superficial uterine serosal burns." This could represent the risk of bowel injury in a patient without laparoscopic-ultrasound guidance.

It is reassuring that the Food and Drug Administration has approved the technology, and we have the American registration study and those from Canada and Europe from which to extrapolate safety and efficacy. Dr. Chudnoff’s study also boasts high subjective "satisfaction" and "effectiveness" scores on patient questionnaires. However, with such a short follow-up, it is hard to predict how many subjects will develop recurrence or ultimately require hysterectomy.

Finally, I caution readers to pay attention to the difference between "statistically significant differences" and "clinically significant differences." Although the UFS-QOL and the EuroQoL are validated fibroid questionnaires, my perusal of published literature did not turn up what would be considered the "minimal clinically significant difference" for each measure. A 50% reduction in severity or improvement in QoL score means nothing if the symptoms are not severe, or if the "bother" is very low. Just because there was a numerical difference in the subjects between pre- and post-treatment does not mean that difference necessarily matters.

Patrick J. Woodman, D.O., is a urogynecologist, associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology, and is chief of specialty care at Marian University College of Osteopathic Medicine in Indianapolis. He said that he has no disclosures pertinent to the story.


 

AT THE 41ST AAGL GLOBAL CONGRESS

LAS VEGAS – Ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation offers women a new, noninvasive treatment option for painful uterine fibroids.

"I actually think this changes the entire outlook," Dr. Scott Chudnoff said at the AAGL Global Congress. "The beauty of this is the simplicity. The risk is so low.

Scott Chudnoff

"I’ve been coming to AAGL for years and what I love about it is seeing the new technology on the horizon, and this is the first one in a few years that is a real game changer for the organization and for gynecology in general," he said in an interview.

He presented data from an international, phase III, single-arm study evaluating the safety and efficacy of the Acessa system to treat moderate to severe bleeding in 135 consecutive women, ages 30-54 years, with symptomatic fibroids.

The results prompted the Food and Drug Administration to clear Acessa for the treatment of uterine leiomyoma on Nov. 6, 2012, just as the AAGL Congress kicked off.

Acessa is already in use in Canada and Europe, and shrinks fibroids using radiofrequency energy delivered via an electrode array inserted into the fibroid under intra-abdominal laparoscopic ultrasound guidance.

One in five women may have fibroids during their childbearing years, and they are present in half of all women by aged 50 years. Many are asymptomatic, but fibroids are also one of the leading causes of hysterectomy.

The last time there was a change in fibroid treatment options was more than 5 years ago with the arrival of MRI-guided focused ultrasound ablation, but the data on this have been somewhat disappointing, said Dr. Chudnoff, director of obstetrics and gynecology and women’s health at Montefiore Medical Center in New York.

There are a range of medical therapies, but they primarily target the symptomatology and not the fibroid itself. Uterine artery embolization is a fantastic procedure, but it’s a global destruction process of the entire uterus, and there are concerns regarding future fertility, he observed. Hysteroscopic fibroid resection is useful for submucosal fibroids, but access is often difficult and women typically have other types of fibroids as well.

Finally, there’s myomectomy, "a bloody, invasive procedure that more often than not dooms the patient to having a Cesarean section and carries a recurrence rate of about 80%," Dr. Chudnoff said.

"So what do you tell your 35-year-old patient that comes into your office and says, ‘What can you do for me?’ " Dr. Chudnoff said. "That’s where I think this comes in. It is that opportunity to get in there early before patients become extremely symptomatic and treat these fibroids with fibroid-directed therapy.

"If in 5 or 10 years they get new fibroids, I can treat them again, but there’s a big difference between doing this and doing a myomectomy again or having to do a hysterectomy in a post-myomectomy patient. Those are disasters," he said.

Women in the trial had clinical menorrhagia (160-500 cc of menstrual blood loss per cycle), no more than six fibroids (mean, five), and a total uterine volume of 300 cc or less. Fibroid types were 193 subserosals, 347 intramurals, 39 transmurals, and 164 submucosals. The trial did not include pedunculated fibroids or type 0 fibroids because of concerns that ablation near the base of the stalk could result in secondary potential complications such as superinfections, he said.

In all, 674 fibroids were treated with Acessa, 96.2% on an outpatient basis. Patients returned to normal activity in an average of 7-10 days, and went back to work at a median of 9 days (range 0-29 days).

Patient-reported symptom severity scores on the validated Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Quality-of-Life (UFS-QOL) questionnaire decreased from a mean of 61.4 at baseline to 28.7 at 3 months, 28.6 at 6 months, and was significant at 26.4 at 12 months (P value less than .001), Dr. Chudnoff reported.

At the same time, mean quality of life scores on the UFS-QOL improved from 37.1 at baseline to 75.2, 78.1, and 80 (P less than .0001 at 12 months).

"What’s important to note is that patients continue to improve and [this] persists at high levels," he said.

Mean scores on the EuroQoL-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) measure also increased from 70.7 at baseline to 84.9 at 3 months, 84.6 at 6 months, and were significant at 85.7 at 12 months (P less than .0001).

There were five (3.7%) device-related adverse events: lower abdominal pain, pelvic abscess, two superficial uterine serosal burns, and post-treatment bleeding.

One patient underwent uterine artery embolization after withdrawing from the trial before her 6-month follow-up visit, resulting in a reintervention rate of 0.7%.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Screening Cuts Breast Cancer Deaths by 20%
MDedge ObGyn
Frovatriptan Shown Advantageous in Menstrual Migraine
MDedge ObGyn
Postpartum Tdap Acceptance Impacts Infant Vaccine Rates
MDedge ObGyn
Women Seeking Oral Contraceptives Have Few Contraindications
MDedge ObGyn
Older Women Lived Longer With Radiotherapy After Lumpectomy
MDedge ObGyn
Cardiac Toxicity Not Seen 25 Years after Breast Radiation
MDedge ObGyn
Odanacatib Adds Bone in Alendronate-Pretreated Osteoporosis
MDedge ObGyn
Age Ups Risk of Other Cancers in Breast Cancer Survivors
MDedge ObGyn
ASCO Update Keeps Breast Cancer Survivor Guidelines Intact
MDedge ObGyn
Kidney Disease a Risk Factor for Death in Pregnancy
MDedge ObGyn