ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate indications, efficacy, and complications associated with pelvic arterial embolization (PAE) for postpartum hemorrhage (PPH).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 117 consecutive patients who underwent PAE for PPH between January 2006 and June 2013.ResultsIn our single-center study, 117 women underwent PAE to control PPH refractory to conservative management including uterine massage, use of uterotonic agents, surgical repair of genital tract lacerations, and removal of retained placental tissues. Among 117 patients, 69 had a vaginal delivery and 48 had a Cesarean section. The major indication for embolization was uterine atony (54.7%). Other causes were low genital tract lacerations (21.4%) and abnormal placentation (14.5%). The procedure showed a clinical success rate of 88.0% with 14 cases of PAE failure; there were 4 hemostatic hysterectomies and 10 re-embolizations. On univariate analysis, PAE failure was associated with overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (P=0.009), transfusion of more than 10 red blood cell units (RBCUs, P=0.002) and embolization of both uterine and ovarian arteries (P=0.003). Multivariate analysis showed that PAE failure was only associated with transfusions of more than 10 RBCUs (odds ratio, 8.011; 95% confidence interval, 1.531-41.912; P=0.014) and embolization of both uterine and ovarian arteries (odds ratio, 20.472; 95% confidence interval, 2.715-154.365; P=0.003), which were not predictive factors, but rather, were the results of longer time for PAE. Three patients showed uterine necrosis and underwent hysterectomy.ConclusionPAE showed high success rates, mostly without procedure-related complications. Thus, it is a safe and effective adjunct or alternative to hemostatic hysterectomy, when primary management fails to control PPH.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparotomy for endometrial cancer. Methods: A total of 104 consecutive patients were non-randomly assigned to either laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy. All patients underwent comprehensive surgical staging procedures including total hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvic/para-aortic lymphadenectomy. The safety, morbidity, and survival rates of the two groups were compared, and the data was retrospectively analyzed. Results: Thirty-four patients received laparoscopic surgery and 70 underwent laparotomy. Operation time for the laparoscopic procedure was 227.0±28.8 minutes, which showed significant difference from the 208.1±46.4 minutes (p=0.032) of the laparotomy group. The estimated blood loss of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery was 230.3±92.4 mL. This was significantly less than that of the laparotomy group (301.9±156.3 mL, p=0.015). The laparoscopic group had an average of 20.8 pelvic and 9.1 para-aortic nodes retrieved, as compared to 17.2 pelvic and 8.5 para-aortic nodes retrieved in the laparotomy group. There was no significant difference (p=0.062, p=0.554). The mean hospitalization duration was significantly greater in the laparotomy group than the laparoscopic group (23.3 and 16.4 days, p＜0.001). The incidence of postoperative complications was 15.7% and 11.8% in the laparotomy and laparoscopic groups respectively. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in the survival rate. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgical staging operation is a safe and effective therapeutic procedure for management of endometrial cancer with an acceptable morbidity compared to the laparotomic approach, and is characterized by far less blood loss and shorter postoperative hospitalization.