ReviewGynecology and pelvic medicine2024
Uterine fibroids: a narrative review of epidemiology and management, with a focus on uterine artery embolization.
Review in Gynecology and pelvic medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transradial versus transfemoral access in uterine artery embolization for fibroids: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- An AI-Driven Clinical Decision Support Model Based on Anemia and Fibroid Parameters to Guide Surgical Decision-Making.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Endometrial Dysfunction in Women with Ovarian and Uterine Tumors: What Is Known and What Should Be Learned?International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Histopathological Outcomes of Myoma Uteri Surgery Over a 10-Year Period: A Retrospective Evaluation of Sarcoma, STUMP, and Benign Variants.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Uterine fibroids (UFs) are the most common benign tumors in women. Despite advances in non-operative technologies, hysterectomy remains the main treatment modality. This review summarizes current minimally invasive treatment options with emphasis on uterine artery embolization (UAE) and its relation to epidemiology and pathophysiology of the disease. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed to compile the most up-to-date research in the field of UFs. The results have been presented as a narrative review. Key Content and Findings: UFs occur in about 25-50% of women with approximately $34 billion direct and indirect annual costs in the United States. Risk factors including black ethnicity, genetic predisposition, and early menarche have been identified in the studies. Medical management is often the first line approach. The newer generation of drugs, selective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRM), have improved treatment outcomes compared to older therapies. Hysterectomy remains the definitive treatment. Uterine-preserving therapies such as myomectomy and magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity ultrasound (MRgHIUS) can preserve fertility. Similarly, UAE offers a unique approach which eliminates the potential surgical side effects with similar outcome profiles. Post-embolization infertility remains the main concern that has been reported in up to 40% of the treated patients in studies with mixed data. Patient selection, pre-procedural evaluation, and anatomical considerations play important roles in procedural outcomes. Conclusions: UAE is a treatment option for UFs. Appropriate patient selection strategies can be achieved by a close collaboration between obstetrician and gynecologists and interventional radiologists and would result in effective fibroid treatment while preserving the uterus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.