Thermal ablative treatment of uterine fibroids

Figures & data

Figure 1. Visualising the ultrasound beam path under MRI guidance.

Figure 2. Real-time thermometry employed during MRgFUS.

Figure 3. Post-treatment non-perfused volume of the uterine fibroid on T1-weighted MRI.

Table 1. Collated data from previous MRgFUS Studies

Authors, years	Study Design	Mean Age	N	SSS at baseline	Mean Volume of Fibroids treated (mL)	NPV ratio (%)	Re-intervention
Stewart et al., 2006 [66]	Meta-analysis	45.4	155	61.7	353	38	21.9% at 1yr
Stewart et al., 2007 [67]	Pros	44.8	109	61.7	284.7	25	– –
Funaki et al., 2007 [68]	Pros	41	52	– –	191.1	69.63	11.8% at 1yr
Fennessy et al., 2007 [69]	Pros	45.9	64	62.1	– –	25.79	– –
Harding et al., 2008 [70]	Pros	45	102	61.5	– –	– –	– –
Morita et al., 2008 [71]	Pros	42.6	48	– –	– –	60	8.3% at 6 months
Mikami et al., 2008 [72]	Pros	44	32	– –	306	– –	– –
Lénárd et al., 2008 [64]	Retro	45.4	66	61.5	255.5	16.3	– –
Funaki et al 2009 [65]	Pros	40.4	91	– –	101.5	54.35 NI 36.2 HI	14.0% at 2yrs NI 21.6% at 2yrs HI
Okada et al., 2009 [73]	Pros	42.5	279	– –	326	46.6	8% at 1yr
Zhang et al., 2010 [74]	Pros	39.4	21	– –	97	75	– –
LeBlang et al., 2010 [75]	Pros	46	80	– –	175	55	– –
Rabinovici et al., 2010 [76]	Pros	37.2	51	– –	268	40	– –
Yoon et al, 2011 [77]	Pros	41.1	20	43.3	– –	53.5	– –
Gorny et al., 2011 [78]	Retro	45.6	130	– –	350.3	45.4	7.4% at 1yr
Machtinger et al., 2012 [79]	Pros	45.6	81	48.82	213	40.9	24% at 2yrs
Voogt et al., 2012 [80]	Pros	44.8	33	– –	– –	21.7	– –
Park et al., 2012 [81]	Retro	39	9	30	197.8	66.9	– –
Dobrotwir and Pun, 2012 [82]	Pros	42	100	59	185.0	67.00	13.7% at 1yr
Kim et al., 2012 [83]	Pros	44.5	27	64.8	502.5	64.2	– –
Trumm et al, 2013 [84]	Retro	42	115	– –	89	88	– –
Froeling et al., 2013 [85]	Retro	36.2	36	60.7	53.2	36.4	66.7% at 5yrs
Quinn et al, 2014 [86]	Retro	42.2	163	62.4	396.3	44.2	58.64% at 5yrs 52.3% at 5yrs (NI) 79.5% at 5yrs (HI)
Mean		42.7	Total n= 1864	56.5	241.4	48.6

HI = Hyperintense fibroid, NI = Normointense fibroid, NPV = Non-perfused volume, N = Numbers, SSS = Symptom severity score

SSS = Symptom severity score

Stewart EA, Rabinovici J, Tempany CM, Inbar Y, Regan L, Gostout B, et al. Clinical outcomes of focused ultrasound surgery for the treatment of uterine fibroids. Fertil Steril 2006;85:22–9

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Stewart EA, Gostout B, Rabinovici J, Kim HS, Regan L, Tempany CM. Sustained relief of leiomyoma symptoms by using focused ultrasound surgery. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:279–87

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Funaki K, Fukunishi H, Funaki T, Sawada K, Kaji Y, Maruo T. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery for uterine fibroids: Relationship between the therapeutic effects and signal intensity of preexisting T2-weighted magnetic resonance images. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;196:184.e1–6

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Fennessy FM, Tempany CM, McDannold NJ, So MJ, Hesley G, Gostout B, et al. Uterine leiomyomas: MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery--results of different treatment protocols. Radiology 2007;243:885–93

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Harding G, Coyne KS, Thompson CL, Spies JB. The responsiveness of the uterine fibroid symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire (UFS-QOL). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008;6:99

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Morita Y, Ito N, Hikida H, Takeuchi S, Nakamura K, Ohashi H. Non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment for uterine fibroids - early experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;139:199–203

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mikami K, Murakami T, Okada A, Osuga K, Tomoda K, Nakamura H. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound ablation of uterine fibroids: Early clinical experience. Radiat Med 2008;26:198–205

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Lénárd ZM, McDannold NJ, Fennessy FM, Stewart EA, Jolesz FA, Hynynen K, et al. Uterine leiomyomas: MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery–imaging predictors of success. Radiology 2008;249:187–94

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Funaki K, Fukunishi H, Sawada K. Clinical outcomes of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery for uterine myomas: 24-month follow-up. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;34:584–9

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Okada A, Morita Y, Fukunishi H, Takeichi K, Murakami T. Non-invasive magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound treatment of uterine fibroids in a large Japanese population: Impact of the learning curve on patient outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;34:579–83

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zhang L, Wang ZB. High-intensity focused ultrasound tumor ablation: Review of ten years of clinical experience. Front Med China 2010;4:294–302

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

LeBlang SD, Hoctor K, Steinberg FL. Leiomyoma shrinkage after MRI-guided focused ultrasound treatment: Report of 80 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:274–80

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rabinovici J, David M, Fukunishi H, Morita Y, Gostout BS, Stewart EA. Pregnancy outcome after magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) for conservative treatment of uterine fibroids. Fertil Steril 2010;93:199–209

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Yoon SW, Seong SJ, Jung SG, Lee SY, Jun HS, Lee JT. Mitigation of abdominal scars during MR-guided focused ultrasound treatment of uterine leiomyomas with the use of an energy-blocking scar patch. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011;22:1747–50

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Gorny KR, Woodrum DA, Brown DL, Henrichsen TL, Weaver AL, Amrami KK, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound of uterine leiomyomas: Review of a 12-month outcome of 130 clinical patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011;22:857–64

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Machtinger R, Inbar Y, Cohen-Eylon S, Admon D, Alagem-Mizrachi A, Rabinovici J. MR-guided focus ultrasound (MRgFUS) for symptomatic uterine fibroids: Predictors of treatment success. Hum Reprod 2012;27:3425–31

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Voogt MJ, Trillaud H, Kim YS, Mali WP, Barkhausen J, Bartels LW, et al. Volumetric feedback ablation of uterine fibroids using magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound therapy. Eur Radiol 2012;22:411–17

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Park H, Yoon SW, Kim KA, Jung Kim D, Jung SG. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment of pedunculated subserosal uterine fibroids: A preliminary report. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012;23:1589–93

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dobrotwir A, Pun E. Clinical 24 month experience of the first MRgFUS unit for treatment of uterine fibroids in Australia. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2012;56:409–16

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kim YS, Trillaud H, Rhim H, Lim HK, Mali W, Voogt M, et al. MR thermometry analysis of sonication accuracy and safety margin of volumetric MR imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of symptomatic uterine fibroids. Radiology 2012;265:627–37

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Trumm CG, Stahl R, Clevert DA, Herzog P, Mindjuk I, Kornprobst S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: Impact of technology advancement on ablation volumes in 115 patients. Invest Radiol 2013;48:359–65

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Froeling V, Meckelburg K, Schreiter NF, Scheurig-Muenkler C, Kamp J, Maurer MH, et al. Outcome of uterine artery embolization versus MR-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for uterine fibroids: Long-term results. Eur J Radiol 2013

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Quinn SD, Vedelago J, Regan L, Gedroyc W. Five-year re-intervention and safety following MRgFUS for uterine fibroids. Eur J Obstetr Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;182:247–51

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar