LAUSR

AIM To evaluate the degree of concordance amongst the currently available guidelines informing the use of uterine artery embolisation (UAE), and identify any inconsistencies present. MATERIALS AND METHODS Standards of practice and quality improvement guidelines were retrieved through a search of PubMed and EMBASE. Additional sets of guidelines were retrieved directly from the websites of known obstetrics and gynaecology and radiological associations. RESULTS Eleven guidelines were retrieved from organisations located in Europe, North America, and Australia. Two main points of divergence were identified in the presented guidance: firstly, on whether submucosal, subserosal, and/or pedunculate fibroids should be considered a relative contraindication to UAE; secondly, on whether UAE should be recommended as an option in patients desiring future fertility. CONCLUSIONS The guidelines reviewed generally suggest UAE to be a safe and effective option for fibroid treatment that can be offered as an alternative to surgical management; however, the number of differing interpretations arising from an apparently similar pool of evidence raises questions about the objectivity of practice guidelines. Although practice guidelines are understood to be a synthesis of clinical evidence and expert opinion, a systematic approach to presenting evidence is necessary to clearly distinguish empirically versus experientially informed guidance.