Objective: Prolactinomas are the most common type of functional, hormone-secreting pituitary adenomas that account for about 40% of total pituitary adenomas. Typical clinical presentations include loss of menstrual periods (amenorrhea) and galactorrhoea in women and sexual dysfunction in men. Prolactinomas are preferentially treated with dopamine agonists and respond to such therapy with hormonal normalisation and tumour shrinkage. However, about 10–20% of prolactinomas are resistant to dopamine agonists. The management of dopamine agonist-resistant prolactinomas poses a therapeutic challenge and includes several possible approaches. Design and Methods: In this study, we present a case report of a woman diagnosed with microprolactinoma at the age of 27 who did not fully respond either to treatment with dopamine agonists nor to transsphenoidal surgery. This was followed by a review of literature on the current state of knowledge about the mechanisms, predictors, and management of dopamine agonist-resistant prolactinomas on the basis of recent scientific literature published up to November 2021 and searches of the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases. Results and Conclusions: The exact mechanisms underlying dopamine agonists’ resistance in lactotroph tumours are not fully understood, yet refractory prolactinomas pose a great challenge in everyday clinical practice. Several predictive factors that contribute to poor response to medical treatment have been identified, among them the elevated Ki-67 index. Recently, various alternative medical treatments have been considered, but their usefulness remains to be evaluated. A return of menses can serve as a first clinical indication of successful medical treatment.

This article has been peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance.It is an open access article, which means that it can be downloaded, printed, and distributed freely, provided the work is properly cited. Articles in "Endokrynologia Polska" are listed in PubMed. The final version may contain major or minor changes.

This article has been peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance.It is an open access article, which means that it can be downloaded, printed, and distributed freely, provided the work is properly cited.Articles in "Ginekologia Polska" are listed in PubMed.

This article has been peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance.It is an open access article, which means that it can be downloaded, printed, and distributed freely, provided the work is properly cited. Articles in "Ginekologia Polska" are listed in PubMed.

Background and Objectives: Uterine artery embolization (UAE) has become an accepted and widely performed therapy for patients with symptomatic (reporting at least two of the following symptoms: severe or prolonged menstrual bleeding, abdominal pain, tension in abdomen, problems with urination, constipation or anemia) uterine fibroids. Although in the majority of cases, bilateral occlusion is required to obtain a successful clinical outcome, there are patients in whom treatment of only one uterine artery could be attempted. There are several reasons for unilateral UAE: hemodynamic conditions, technical difficulties, anatomical variants and unilateral dominancy of blood supply to the fibroid. Our aim is to present our 10-year experience with unilateral UAE and evaluate the radiological and clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: Records of 369 patients with fibroids who underwent UAE from 2010 to 2021 were analyzed. We identified 26 patients treated with unilateral uterine artery embolization and analyzed the data of these patients. All patients attended medical consultation, were assessed using a five-grade symptom scale and underwent MRI examination. Clinical response was evaluated at least 6 months after the procedure and was categorized to one of the following groups: complete improvement, partial improvement, no change and a worsening in symptoms. Results: Twenty-two patients (85%) reported at least partial improvement 6 months following the procedure. One patient required secondary embolization due to recanalization. The secondary procedure was successful, and complete improvement was achieved. One patient did not observe any clinical improvement, and in two cases, symptom recurrence was observed. All three patients were referred for surgical treatment. No major complications were noted. Overall, the success rate was 88%. Conclusions: The results of our study support the statement that elective unilateral embolization is an appropriate treatment in patients with a dominant uterine artery.