Randomised trial of two embolic agents for uterine artery embolisation for fibroids: Gelfoam versus Embospheres (RAGE trial)

Abstract

Abstract Background Uterine artery embolisation (UAE) is an established treatment option for women with symptomatic uterine fibroids who wish to avoid surgery. However the most efficacious embolic agent remains uncertain. Methods We conducted a pilot double blind randomized controlled trial comparing Gelfoam with Embospheres in women undergoing UAE. Outcomes recorded at baseline, 24-h, 1 and 6 months included complications, inflammatory, haematological markers and ovarian function. Contrast enhanced MRI (CEMRI) was acquired at baseline, 24-h and 6 months. Pain score (visual analogue) was measured at 24-h, quality of life (UFS-Qol) at baseline, 1 and 6 months. All patients were followed to 6 months. Results Twenty patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either Gelfoam (G) or Embospheres (E). The UFS-Qol symptom score improved in both groups at 6 months mean of 64 ± 18 to 23 ± 16 and 54 ± 15 to 32 ± 26 in the E and G groups respectively. UFS-Qol HRQL also improved in both groups at 6 months, mean 41 ± 28 to 79 ± 20 and 53 ± 19 to 78 ± 21 in the E and G groups respectively. Uterine volume at 6 months reduced from 1018 ± 666mls to 622 ± 436 (p = 0.001) and from 1026 ± 756 to 908 ± 720 (p = 0.15) in the E and G groups respectively. There was a significant difference between groups for this parameter p = 0.01. All uterine arteries were patent at 24-h and 6 months. Complete (100%) fibroid infarction rates were 5(50%) and 2(20%) in the E and G groups respectively. None of the other outcome measures showed any between group differences. There were no re-interventions in either group. Conclusion The only significant between group differences was for a greater reduction in uterine volume at 6 months in the E group. A larger trial (estimate 172 subjects) is required to determine whether other apparent differences are clinically and statistically significant. Trial registration ISRCTN67347987