Department of Radiology, St George's Hospital, Blackshaw Road, London, SW17 0QT, United Kingdom,
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014 Oct;37(5):1179-90. doi: 10.1007/s00270-013-0790-0. Epub 2013 Dec 3.
This study was designed to undertake systematic review and meta-analysis of published comparative trials comparing embolic agents used in uterine artery embolisation (UAE) for uterine leiomyomata.
Systematic literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Central databases from database inception to July 2012. Randomised and nonrandomised trials comparing two or more embolic agents used in UAE were included. Assessment included five widely used embolic agents: nonspherical polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) (Contour PVA, Boston Scientific or PVA Cook Medical); spherical PVA (Contour SE, Boston Scientific); acrylamido PVA (Beadblock, Biocompatibles, Terumo); tris-acryl gelatin microspheres (TAGM) (Embospheres, Merit Medical Inc); and polyzene-F hydrogel microspheres (Embozenes, CeloNova Biosciences). Outcomes assessed included: quality of life (QOL), assessment, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), uterine and fibroid volumes and degrees of MRI fibroid enhancement and devascularisation. A total of 262 citations were reviewed with 5 randomised, controlled trials involving 295 women and 5 non-RCTs involving 617 women included.
No evidence of superiority of any embolic agent was demonstrated. Meta-analysis was performed between TAGM (Embospheres) and spherical PVA microspheres. Two RCTs found a trend toward greater uterine and dominant fibroid volume reductions with Embospheres but the combined differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.78 and p = 0.94 respectively). Embospheres demonstrated greater percentage fibroid devascularisation than spherical PVA (p = 0.039).
This study confirms that the current evidence demonstrates superiority of Embospheres over spherical PVA but no reported differences in outcomes between any of the other agents. Comparison of embolic agents was limited by lack of RCT data and further research is warranted.
本研究旨在对子宫动脉栓塞术(UAE)中使用的栓塞剂进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较治疗子宫肌瘤的疗效。
系统检索 MEDLINE、Embase、PubMed 和 Cochrane 中央数据库,检索时间截至 2012 年 7 月。纳入比较两种或两种以上栓塞剂在 UAE 中应用的随机和非随机试验。评估包括五种广泛应用的栓塞剂:非球形聚乙烯醇(PVA)(Contour PVA,Boston Scientific 或 PVA Cook Medical);球形 PVA(Contour SE,Boston Scientific);丙烯酰胺 PVA(Beadblock,Biocompatibles,Terumo);三丙烯酰明胶微球(TAGM)(Embospheres,Merit Medical Inc);聚己内酯-F 水凝胶微球(Embozenes,CeloNova Biosciences)。评估的结果包括:生活质量(QOL)、评估、磁共振成像(MRI)、子宫和肌瘤体积以及 MRI 肌瘤增强和去血管化程度。共评价了 262 篇引文,其中包括 5 项随机对照试验,涉及 295 名女性和 5 项非 RCTs,涉及 617 名女性。
没有证据表明任何栓塞剂具有优越性。对 TAGM(Embospheres)和球形 PVA 微球进行了荟萃分析。两项 RCT 发现,使用 Embospheres 治疗后,子宫和主要肌瘤体积减少的趋势更大,但联合差异无统计学意义(分别为 p = 0.78 和 p = 0.94)。Embospheres 显示出比球形 PVA 更高的肌瘤去血管化百分比(p = 0.039)。
本研究证实,目前的证据表明,与球形 PVA 相比,Embospheres 具有优越性,但没有报告任何其他药物之间的结果差异。由于缺乏 RCT 数据,对栓塞剂的比较受到限制,需要进一步研究。