Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
This Post Market study is being conducted to compare the direct and indirect cost of three approaches (GFA, myomectomy, and uterine artery embolization) for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids.
Full description
Uterine fibroids are the most common pelvic neoplasms in women; they severely impact quality of life and are the leading indication for hysterectomy. Hysterectomy is the definitive treatment for myomas; however, many patients seek alternative uterine-sparing therapy and desire to conserve their fertility. Myomectomy is a much-reported surgical option for women with symptomatic fibroids and, until recently, the abdominal approach has been the approach of choice for most surgeons. Over time, patients have requested less invasive procedures and minimally invasive, laparoscopic options are becoming more popular among patients and their gynecologists. Standard surgical and interventional treatments for uterine fibroids are costly to society and to the health care system. New technologies such as GFA may offer a low-cost alternative to the standard treatments for symptomatic uterine fibroids in women who desire uterine conservation. This study seeks to evaluate those cost differences between three available uterine-sparing techniques and to explore the qualitative outcomes such as symptom severity, health related quality of life, and overall treatment effect.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
84 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal