ArticleScientific reports2020
Pathological findings in the endometrium after microwave endometrial ablation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The acceptance of MEA in Japan is well demand due to its outstanding effectiveness and safety. Infrequently, a repeat MEA or hysterectomy is needed for recurrent menorrhagia in case of failure ablation. The reasons of recurrent menorrhagia subsequent MEA treatment are unclear. The objective of current study is to identify the possible causes of menorrhagia repetition following MEA, together with the observation of histological changes in the endometrium due to this treatment compared with normal cycling endometrial tissue. A total of 170 patients, 8 (4.7%) of them carried out hysterectomy after 16.8 months (range, 2-29 months) of MEA treatment. Normal (n = 47) and MEA (n = 8) treated paraffin embedded endometrial tissue were prepared for hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and immunostaining study to recognize the histological changes in the endometrium as a result of MEA treatment. The histological features observed increased tubal metaplasia (TM) including negative expression of the estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) in the endometrium subsequent MEA treatment. Increased TM together with the absence of ER and PR expression might be a reasonable explanation for repetition menorrhagia in cases of failure ablation. Further study is required to clarify the molecular mechanisms of tubal metaplasia and the expression loss of hormone receptor in the endometrium as a result of MEA treatment. Current studies propose that low dose estrogen-progestin may not be effective with recurrent menorrhagia patient's due to the inadequacy of hormone receptor expression in the endometrium following MEA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.