title: Clinical Predictors of Long-term Success in Ultrasound-guided High-intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation Treatment for Adenomyosis: A Retrospective Study.
abstract: The long-term outcomes of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) ablation treatment for adenomyosis and the relevant factors affecting the durability of symptom relief were assessed in this study.A total of 230 women with adenomyosis who were treated with USgHIFU ablation between January 2007 and December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) was performed immediately after the treatment to evaluate the ablation effect, and the nonperfused volume (NPV) ratio was then calculated. Regular follow-up was conducted and the visual analog scale (VAS) score was used to assess the changes in dysmenorrhea. The effect of treatment was evaluated after an average follow-up length of 3 months and the factors affecting clinical success and symptom relapse were identified.Of the 230 treated patients, 208 (90.4%) were followed up regularly, with a median follow-up length of 40 months (range, 18-94 months). Mean value of the NPV ratio calculated immediately after the treatment was 57.4 ± 24.4%. Varying degrees of symptomatic relief of dysmenorrhea based on the VAS scores were observed in 173 (83.2%) patients and 71.0% of the patients were asymptomatic during follow-up. Women with higher NPV ratio (OR = 0.964, 95% CI = 0.947-0.982, P = 0.000) and older age (OR = 0.342, 95% CI = 0.143-0.819, P = 0.016) were more likely to achieve clinical success. Dysmenorrhea recurred in 45 (26%) out of 173 cases; the median recurrence time was 12 months after treatment. The lower BMI (OR = 1.221, 95% CI = 1.079-1.381, P = 0.001) and the higher acoustic power (OR = 0.992, 95% CI = 0.986-0.998, P = 0.007) were associated with less risk of relapse. Twelve of the 14 patients who were retreated by USgHIFU ablation after experiencing dysmenorrhea recurrence achieved clinical success.USgHIFU ablation is an effective uterus-conserving treatment for symptomatic adenomyosis with an acceptable long-term success rate. Higher chance of clinical success can be achieved in patients with larger NPV ratio and older age, whereas higher BMI and lower acoustic power may result in a higher chance of recurrence. These factors are helpful in selecting suitable patients for USgHIFU and in predicting the durability of symptom relief.
authors.affiliation: From the Department of Ultrasound, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
authors.forename: Xin
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.forename: Wei
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Yang
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Yuexiang
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Qiuyang
authors.initials: Q
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Jie
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Tang
mesh_terms: D062788:Adenomyosis / Q000628:therapy*; D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D057086:High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D010147:Pain Measurement; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014594:Uterine Neoplasms / Q000628:therapy*; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Ultrason Sonochem. 2015 Nov;27:677-681
references.pmid: 26050604
references.citation: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jul;165(1):229-31
references.pmid: 1853902
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2011 Mar 1;95(3):1152-5
references.pmid: 20970127
references.citation: Acad Radiol. 2009 Nov;16(11):1416-23
references.pmid: 19683943
references.citation: Radiology. 1984 Oct;153(1):113-6
references.pmid: 6473771
references.citation: Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Dec;53(4):459-65
references.pmid: 25510683
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Sep;181(3):851-6
references.pmid: 12933493
references.citation: Radiology. 1994 Mar;190(3):803-6
references.pmid: 8115630
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011 Jul-Aug;18(4):428-37
references.pmid: 21622029
references.citation: Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Mar;124(3):207-11
references.pmid: 24380611
references.citation: J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008 Sep-Oct;15(5):571-9
references.pmid: 18657480
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2012 Nov;22(11):2553-8
references.pmid: 22653287
references.citation: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Dec;20(6):605-11
references.pmid: 12493051
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2011 Mar 1;95(3):900-5
references.pmid: 21067723
references.citation: Hum Reprod Update. 1998 Jul-Aug;4(4):323-36
references.pmid: 9825848
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Jan;188(1):176-81
references.pmid: 17179361
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Sep;78(3 Pt 2):538-9
references.pmid: 1908069
references.citation: BJOG. 2005 Apr;112(4):461-5
references.pmid: 15777445
references.citation: Radiology. 2005 Mar;234(3):948-53
references.pmid: 15681687
references.citation: Fertil Steril. 2008 Nov;90(5):2018.e13-5
references.pmid: 18692791
references.citation: Eur J Radiol. 2009 Apr;70(1):128-32
references.pmid: 18280686
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jan;190(1):191-9
references.pmid: 18094311
references.citation: J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003 Sep;14(9 Pt 2):S467-76
references.pmid: 14514862