Talk:Uterine artery embolization

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's Health Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Adverse effects[edit]

Can anybody evaluate the extent of these adverse effects? Is it 1%, 1/1,000, 1,10,000? The tone seems to emphasize the dangers. --Nbauman (talk) 23:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The edit history on this article show numerous instances where research citations enumerating the complication rates of this procedure have been edited out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.61.87.109 (talk) 03:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tone indeed was overly alarmist, a comparison with hysterectomy and other alternative procedures is probably the most useful quantification of side effects. Wikipedia should not turn a blind eye to problems but also needs to provide a balanced perspective. Richiez (talk) 11:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

uncommon in USA?[edit]

Seems the references to this procedure are from the United Kingdom, with one or two studies from Australia and the Netherlands. I'm wondering if this procedure is not usually offered in the USA? (hysterectomy is usually the first solution offered for post-childbearing women.) The Mayo clinic http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/uterine-artery-embolization/MY00502/DSECTION=results states that long term studies are not available on UAE. Also that five year surveys show similar results to myomectomy. But I'm wondering if American doctors generally avoid providing UAE (I won't speculate as to various possible reasons.) And perhaps the article focuses on the negatives for similar reasons. Tkech (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: WikiProject Medicine Fall 2023 UCF COM[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 October 2023 and 19 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ckyin19 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ckyin19 (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest the following possible changes:

Improve the lead section by briefly expanding on the indications since the procedure is not only for fibroids and adenomyosis
Add images of uterine fibroids and adenomyosis
Add a section for contraindications
Expand and add citations for the procedure section
Add citations for the adverse effects section and restructure to highlight the more common complications
Add more detailed information regarding the recovery time
Add a section on outcomes and rates of fertility based on published systematic reviews — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckyin19 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review for User:Ckyin19

The article is well written, with appropriate sources and grammar
The sources and links work correctly
Readability is intact throughout
The article mainly follows the Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) guidelines. I would suggest updating the Adverse effects section to the title of either Risks, Complications, or Risks/Complications per the manual guidelines. I think the Pre-operative preparation section is great, but would follow the outline better as subsection of the Technique section. I would also suggest maybe updating the Outcomes heading to Recovery to match the manual.
The technique section could benefit from some condensing, or even separating the section with sub-headings. A few more citations seem to be needed for this section if possible. Overall very well written, but a bit in-depth for the target audience.
The additional sources are great. If possible, removal/update of some less recent (>10years) sources would elevate the article
Overall an awesome job, with a lot of efforts. I can tell you added a lot to the article!
Going through your goals, these were well thought-out and met. Including:
- The lead section was expanded for indications
- The OR image added is a great addition to help visualize the procedure environment
- Contraindication section was created
- Citations were added throughout
- Outcomes added/expanded

CourseAccount2024 (talk) 19:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your review and your thoughtful suggestions. I made the following edits:

Changed the adverse effects heading to the Risks/Complications
Moved the pre-op section to the techniques section
Cut down the techniques section and edited the language to be more fitting for a general audience
Updated some of the citations

Ckyin19 (talk) 21:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]