Descamps, Philippe

Abstract Uterine fibroids (leiomyomas) and adenomyosis are among the most common benign gynecological conditions affecting women of reproductive age. These disorders are frequently associated with abnormal uterine bleeding, pelvic pain, pressure symptoms on adjacent pelvic organs, and potential infertility. The incidence of fibroids increases as women enter their third and fourth decades of life. In parallel, recent trends in delayed childbearing have further emphasized the need for fertility‐preserving treatment options. Notably, fibroids have a higher prevalence in African‐American women, highlighting a significant disparity in health needs compared to white women. Historically, hysterectomy and myomectomy were considered definitive treatments. However, these procedures carry inherent surgical risks, longer recovery periods, and, in the case of hysterectomy, a complete loss of reproductive potential. Consequently, there is increasing demand for uterus‐sparing, minimally invasive alternatives that provide effective symptom control with lower morbidity and preservation of fertility. Among the evolving treatment options, three image‐guided, minimally invasive therapies have gained particular attention: Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE), Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA), and High‐Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU). Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE), also known as uterine fibroid embolization (UFE), is a well‐established endovascular procedure in which embolic agents are introduced via catheterization of the uterine arteries, inducing ischemia and infarction of fibroids. Performed under conscious sedation or regional anesthesia, UAE has demonstrated significant reductions in fibroid volume and symptom relief in over 80% of appropriately selected patients. All image‐guided techniques are especially beneficial for women who desire uterine preservation, have contraindications to surgery, or wish to avoid major operative interventions. In comparison with UAE, Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) uses targeted thermal energy to induce coagulative necrosis within fibroid tissue. This approach can be delivered via laparoscopic, transcervical, or transvaginal routes, depending on the platform. The Sonata® System integrates intrauterine ultrasound guidance with energy delivery, enabling precise fibroid targeting with minimal myometrial damage. RFA is associated with shorter recovery and less intraoperative blood loss, though it is more suitable for smaller or fewer fibroids and may be less ideal for extensive disease. Together, these advancements reflect a paradigm shift in fibroid management—driven by demographic trends, racial disparities, patient preferences, and technological innovations—toward evidence‐based, uterus‐preserving therapies tailored to individual patient needs. This article discusses details of each technique including the procedure, benefits and complications and also the impact on particular situations such as pregnancy. Some key points common to each technique are also mentioned.

AbstractEndometriosis is a complex gynecologic disorder characterized primarily by symptoms of pelvic pain, infertility, and altered quality of life. National and international guidelines highlight the diagnostic difficulties and lack of conclusive diagnostic tools for endometriosis. Furthermore, guidelines are becoming questionable at an increasingly rapid rate as new diagnostic techniques emerge. This work aims to provide a knowledge synthesis of the relevance of various diagnostic tools and to assess areas of improvement of conventional algorithms. MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases were searched from January 2021 to December 2023 using relevant key words. Articles evaluating the diagnostic relevance and performance of various tools were included and independently reviewed by the authors for eligibility. Included studies were assessed using the GRADE and QUADAS‐2 tools. Of the 4204 retrieved articles, 26 were included. While anamnesis and clinical examination do contribute to diagnostic accuracy, their level of evidence and impact on the diagnostic process remains limited. Although imaging techniques are recommended to investigate endometriosis, ultrasonography remains highly operator dependent. Magnetic resonance imaging appears to exhibit higher sensitivities than ultrasound. However, concerns persist with regards to the terminology, anatomical definition of lesions, and accuracies of both ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. Recently, several biological markers have been studied and cumulative evidence supports the contribution of noncoding RNAs to the diagnosis of endometriosis. Marginal improvements have been suggested for anamnesis, clinical examination, and imaging examinations. Conversely, some biomarkers, including the saliva microRNA signature for endometriosis, have emerged as diagnostic tools which inspire reflection on the revision of conventional diagnostic algorithms.