ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02163525Updated Sep 30, 2025

Post Market TRUST - U.S.A. Study

An interventional study of Global Fibroid Ablation (GFA) and Abdominal or Laparoscopic Myomectomy in Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids, sponsored by Acessa Health, Inc.. Completed at 9 sites in United States. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-30.

Sponsored by Acessa Health, Inc. (part of Hologic, Inc.) · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
114
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

This Post Market study is being conducted to compare the direct and indirect cost of three approaches (GFA, myomectomy, and uterine artery embolization) for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids. In addition, data from this study is being used to satisfy the requirements of the United States Food and Drug Administration's 522 (post market surveillance) order.

Read the detailed description

The purpose of this study is to 1) evaluate the economic burden, safety and outcomes of three uterine-conserving treatment alternatives for symptomatic uterine fibroids: myomectomy, uterine artery embolization (UAE), and global fibroid ablation (GFA) using the Acessa™ System, and 2) meet the requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's 522 Order for post market surveillance In this study, subjects who have symptomatic uterine fibroids will be randomized to one of three uterine-conserving treatments based on the local standard of care.

02

Conditions studied

  • Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids

Keywords

  • Fibroids
  • Myomas
  • leiomyomata
  • menorrhagia
  • Acessa Procedure
  • Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA)
  • GFA
  • Acessa
03

In context

Leiomyoma

438 studies on the registry are indexed under Leiomyoma; 74 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 114 is above the median of 66 across 306 interventional studies indexed under Leiomyoma.

Browse Leiomyoma studies →

Lead sponsor

Acessa Health, Inc. is the lead sponsor of 5 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

First submitted before Acessa Health, Inc. became part of Hologic, Inc..

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Are ≥ 18 years old and menstruating
  • Have symptomatic uterine fibroids
  • Have a uterine size ≤ 16 gestational weeks as determined by pelvic exam
  • Have all fibroids that are less than 10 cm in any diameter
  • Desire uterine conservation
  • Have had a normal Pap smear within the past 36 months defined as "no untreated cervical or dysplasia."
  • Are willing and able to comply with all study tests, procedures, and assessment tools
  • Are capable of providing .

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Have for laparoscopic surgery and/or general anesthesia.
  • Are expected to be high risk for, or are known to have, significant intra-abdominal adhesions (defined as adhesions that would require extensive dissection to mobilize and view all surfaces of the uterus)
  • Patients requiring major elective concomitant procedures (e.g., hernia repair)
  • Are pregnant or lactating
  • Have taken any depot gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRh) agonist within three months prior to the screening procedures
  • Have an implanted intrauterine or fallopian tube device for that cannot or will not be removed at least 10 days prior to treatment
  • Have chronic pelvic pain known to not be due to uterine fibroids
  • Have known or suspected endometriosis Stage 3 or 4, adenomyosis
  • Have active or history of pelvic inflammatory disease
  • Have a history of, or evidence of, gynecologic or pre-malignancy within the past five years
  • Have had pelvic radiation
  • Have a non-uterine pelvic mass over 3 cm
  • Have a cervical myoma
  • Have one or more completely intracavitary submucous fibroids (Type 0) or only Type 0/1 submucous fibroids that are better treated via hysteroscopic methods
  • In the medical judgment of the investigator should not participate in the study
  • Are not willing to be randomized to treatment.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(4)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

Contraception

Ways of preventing pregnancy. “Highly effective” methods fail less than 1% of the time a year when used correctly — for example an IUD or an implant.

Criteria usually say which methods count and how long to keep using them after the last dose, sometimes for male participants too. Some studies accept a partner’s vasectomy if it was confirmed successful and that person is the participant’s only sexual partner.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
114 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Ablation vs Embolization

    Women are randomized 1:1 to either global fibroid ablation (GFA) or uterine artery embolization (UAE)

    Procedure: Global Fibroid Ablation (GFA) · Procedure: Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE)

  • Active comparator
    Ablation vs Myomectomy

    Women are randomized 1:1 to either global fibroid ablation (GFA) or myomectomy (laparoscopic or abdominal)

    Procedure: Global Fibroid Ablation (GFA) · Procedure: Abdominal or Laparoscopic Myomectomy

Interventions

  • ProcedureGlobal Fibroid Ablation (GFA)

    GFA is radiofrequency ablation of fibroids. This is a laparoscopic procedure whereby a radiofrequency probe is inserted into the fibroid under laparoscopic and ultrasound guidance. Each fibroid is heated to temperatures averaging 95 deg C. The fibroid undergoes coagulative necrosis and shrinks and/or disappears.

    Also known as: GFA, Radiofrequency ablation, RFA, Radiofrequency volumetric fibroid ablation, Acessa procedure, Acessa treatment

  • ProcedureAbdominal or Laparoscopic Myomectomy

    Myomectomy is a procedure in which an incision is made into the uterus and the fibroids are surgically removed from the uterus. The uterine incision is closed with sutures. This procedure can be performed through an abdominal incision or via laparoscopy.

    Also known as: Myomectomy

  • ProcedureUterine Artery Embolization (UAE)

    UAE is a minimally invasive surgical procedure used to treat uterine fibroids. An embolic material is injected into the uterine artery(ies) to block blood flow to one or more fibroids. This procedure is performed by an interventional radiologist.

    Also known as: UAE, Uterine Fibroid Embolization, UFE

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Compare direct cost of GFA compared to those of myomectomy and UAE

    To compare medical, surgical, and hospitalization costs (including procedural complication costs) of Global Fibroid Ablation (GFA) compared to those of Myomectomy and Uterine Artery Embolization (UAE)at 3 months post procedure.

    Time frame: 3 months post procedure

  2. Compare rates of acute and near-term serious complications to the acute and near-term treatment-related serious adverse events of pivotal study.

    Overall rates of acute (within 48 hours post procedure) and near-term (between 2 and 30 days post procedure) serious complications in all GFA subjects compared to the acute and near-term treatment-related serious adverse event rates in the pivotal study.

    Time frame: 30 days post procedure

Secondary outcomes

  1. Assess the incidence and cost of post discharge procedure-related complications and reinterventions

    Safety measures will be assessed by comparing the complication and reintervention rate for all three alternatives (GFA, Myomectomy, UAE).

    Time frame: 60 months

  2. Assess factors that influence indirect costs of the three treatment alternatives

    Compare incidence costs of post discharge procedure-related complications and re-interventions we well as indirect cost factors defined as days to return-to-work, return to normal activities of daily living, and cost of care up to 60 months post discharge.

    Time frame: 60 months

  3. Assess Uterine Fibroid Symptom Severity and Quality of Life (UFS-QoL) pre-treatment to post treatment in all treatment groups

    To compare fibroid symptom severity and quality of life scores at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months post procedure as compared to baseline using the Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Health Related Quality of Life (UFS-QoL) assessment tool.

    Time frame: 60 months

  4. Assess subjects menstrual bleeding using the MIQ

    Compare subjects menstrual bleeding pre-treatment and up to 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months post treatment using the Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire (MIQ).

    Time frame: 60 months

  5. Assess subject's satisfaction with her treatment

    Assess the subject's satisfaction with her assigned procedure at 12 months post procedure using the Overall Treatment Effect questionnaire

    Time frame: 12 months

  6. Assess the subject's general health outcome

    General health outcome evaluation at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months post procedure as compared to baseline using the EuroQol (EQ-5D), a standardized instrument for use as a measure of health outcome

    Time frame: 60 months post procedure

  7. Assess the incidence of serious complications per investigator-surgeon during training and post training.

    The incidence of acute and near-term serious complications following the GFA cases will also be analyzed by investigator-surgeon during the training and post training periods..

    Time frame: 60 months

07

Study locations

9 sites
  • University of California, Los Angeles
    Santa Monica, California 90401, United States
  • Aspen Surgery Center/John Muir Hospital
    Walnut Creek, California 94598, United States
  • Augusta University
    Augusta, Georgia 30912-3360, United States
  • University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences
    Chicago, Illinois 60637, United States
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital
    Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts 02130, United States
  • Henry Ford Hospital
    West Bloomfield, Michigan 48322, United States
  • University of Rochester Medical Center
    Rochester, New York 14642, United States
  • Texas Fertility Center
    Austin, Texas 78731, United States
  • INOVA
    Falls Church, Virginia 60637, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Spies JB, Coyne K, Guaou Guaou N, Boyle D, Skyrnarz-Murphy K, Gonzalves SM. The UFS-QOL, a new disease-specific symptom and health-related quality of life questionnaire for leiomyomata. Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Feb;99(2):290-300. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01702-1. PubMed 11814511 ↗
  • Viswanathan M, Hartmann K, McKoy N, Stuart G, Rankins N, Thieda P, Lux LJ, Lohr KN. Management of uterine fibroids: an update of the evidence. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2007 Jul;(154):1-122. PubMed 18288885 ↗
  • Twijnstra AR, Kolkman W, Trimbos-Kemper GC, Jansen FW. Implementation of advanced laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: national overview of trends. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Jul-Aug;17(4):487-92. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2010.03.010. Epub 2010 May 14. PubMed 20471917 ↗
  • Holzer A, Jirecek ST, Illievich UM, Huber J, Wenzl RJ. Laparoscopic versus open myomectomy: a double-blind study to evaluate postoperative pain. Anesth Analg. 2006 May;102(5):1480-4. doi: 10.1213/01.ane.0000204321.85599.0d. PubMed 16632830 ↗
  • Parker WH, Iacampo K, Long T. Uterine rupture after laparoscopic removal of a pedunculated myoma. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007 May-Jun;14(3):362-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2006.10.024. PubMed 17478371 ↗
  • Banas T, Klimek M, Fugiel A, Skotniczny K. Spontaneous uterine rupture at 35 weeks' gestation, 3 years after laparoscopic myomectomy, without signs of fetal distress. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2005 Dec;31(6):527-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2005.00331.x. PubMed 16343253 ↗
  • Moss JG, Cooper KG, Khaund A, Murray LS, Murray GD, Wu O, Craig LE, Lumsden MA. Randomised comparison of uterine artery embolisation (UAE) with surgical treatment in patients with symptomatic uterine fibroids (REST trial): 5-year results. BJOG. 2011 Jul;118(8):936-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02952.x. Epub 2011 Apr 12. PubMed 21481151 ↗
  • Mara M, Maskova J, Fucikova Z, Kuzel D, Belsan T, Sosna O. Midterm clinical and first reproductive results of a randomized controlled trial comparing uterine fibroid embolization and myomectomy. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008 Jan-Feb;31(1):73-85. doi: 10.1007/s00270-007-9195-2. Epub 2007 Oct 18. PubMed 17943348 ↗
  • Manyonda IT, Bratby M, Horst JS, Banu N, Gorti M, Belli AM. Uterine artery embolization versus myomectomy: impact on quality of life--results of the FUME (Fibroids of the Uterus: Myomectomy versus Embolization) Trial. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012 Jun;35(3):530-6. doi: 10.1007/s00270-011-0228-5. Epub 2011 Jul 20. PubMed 21773858 ↗
  • Carls GS, Lee DW, Ozminkowski RJ, Wang S, Gibson TB, Stewart E. What are the total costs of surgical treatment for uterine fibroids? J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2008 Sep;17(7):1119-32. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2008.0456. PubMed 18687032 ↗
  • Nash K, Feinglass J, Zei C, Lu G, Mengesha B, Lewicky-Gaupp C, Lin A. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic myomectomy versus abdominal myomectomy: a comparative analysis of surgical outcomes and costs. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Feb;285(2):435-40. doi: 10.1007/s00404-011-1999-2. Epub 2011 Jul 22. PubMed 21779774 ↗
  • Al-Fozan H, Dufort J, Kaplow M, Valenti D, Tulandi T. Cost analysis of myomectomy, hysterectomy, and uterine artery embolization. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Nov;187(5):1401-4. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.127374. PubMed 12439538 ↗
  • Bushnell DM, Martin ML, Moore KA, Richter HE, Rubin A, Patrick DL. Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire: assessing the influence of heavy menstrual bleeding on quality of life. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010 Dec;26(12):2745-55. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2010.532200. Epub 2010 Nov 3. PubMed 21043553 ↗
  • Hartung J, Knapp G. On tests of the overall treatment effect in meta-analysis with normally distributed responses. Stat Med. 2001 Jun 30;20(12):1771-82. doi: 10.1002/sim.791. PubMed 11406840 ↗
  • Chudnoff SG, Berman JM, Levine DJ, Harris M, Guido RS, Banks E. Outpatient procedure for the treatment and relief of symptomatic uterine myomas. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 May;121(5):1075-1082. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31828b7962. PubMed 23635746 ↗
  • Robles R, Aguirre VA, Argueta AI, Guerrero MR. Laparoscopic radiofrequency volumetric thermal ablation of uterine myomas with 12 months of follow-up. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013 Jan;120(1):65-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.07.023. Epub 2012 Oct 14. PubMed 23073229 ↗
  • Garza Leal JG, Hernandez Leon I, Castillo Saenz L, Lee BB. Laparoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency volumetric thermal ablation of symptomatic uterine leiomyomas: feasibility study using the Halt 2000 Ablation System. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011 May-Jun;18(3):364-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.02.006. PubMed 21545960 ↗
  • Guido RS, Macer JA, Abbott K, Falls JL, Tilley IB, Chudnoff SG. Radiofrequency volumetric thermal ablation of fibroids: a prospective, clinical analysis of two years' outcome from the Halt trial. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Aug 13;11:139. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-139. PubMed 23941588 ↗
  • Macer JA. For uterine-sparing fibroid treatment, consider laparoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation. obmanagement.com Vol 25 No. 11 November 2013
  • Berman JM, Guido RS, Garza Leal JG, Pemueller RR, Whaley FS, Chudnoff SG; Halt Study Group. Three-year outcome of the Halt trial: a prospective analysis of radiofrequency volumetric thermal ablation of myomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Sep-Oct;21(5):767-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.02.015. Epub 2014 Mar 5. PubMed 24613404 ↗
  • Yu S, Silverberg K, Bhagavath B, Shobeiri SA, Propst A, Eisenstein D. Post-Market Safety of Laparoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation. JSLS. 2020 Oct-Dec;24(4):e2020.00050. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2020.00050. PubMed 33510567 ↗
  • Braun KM, Sheridan M, Latif EZ, Regush L, Maksymowicz A, Weins L, Bedaiwy MA, Tyson N, Davidson MJ, Sanders BH. Surgeons' early experience with the Acessa procedure: gaining proficiency with new technology. Int J Womens Health. 2016 Nov 23;8:669-675. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S119265. eCollection 2016. PubMed 27920582 ↗
  • Yu S, Bhagavath B, Shobeiri SA, Eisenstein D, Levy B. Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes of Pre- and Postsurgical Treatment of Symptomatic Uterine Leiomyomas: A 12-Month Follow-up Review of TRUST, a Surgical Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Radiofrequency Ablation and Myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022 Jun;29(6):726-737. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2022.01.009. Epub 2022 Jan 24. PubMed 35085837 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
Not marked actual or estimatedDates not marked actual or estimated

The record gives a start of Jun 2014, a primary completion of Jul 2019 and a completion of Sep 2025. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jun 11, 2014
First posted
Jun 13, 2014
Start
Jun 12, 2014
Primary completionActual
Jul 2019
CompletionActual
Sep 12, 2025
Last update
Sep 30, 2025
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 30, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02163525
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jun 13, 2014
Start date
Jun 12, 2014
Primary completion
Jul 2019
Completion
Sep 12, 2025
Last update
Sep 30, 2025

Study contacts

David Eisenstein, MD
study director · Henry Ford Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion