ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparison of the effects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and conventional ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation on benign thyroid nodules.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to improve the management of microwave thyroid nodule ablation.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2026Review
- Ultrasound characteristics of primary fallopian tube carcinoma and the misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effect of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and conventional ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) on benign thyroid nodules (BTNs). Methods: In this retrospective observational study, the data of 72 patients with BTNs who received RFA treatment in The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine from January 2020 to December 2021 were retrospectively reviewed and selected. The records showed that 34 patients received RFA under the guidance of conventional ultrasound (conventional ultrasound group) and 38 patients received RFA under the guidance of CEUS (CEUS group). The effect of treatment, complications and recurrence of the two groups were compared and analyzed. Results: There was a smaller volume of thyroid nodules in the two groups immediately post-operation. The incidence of complications was lower in the CEUS group (5.26%) compared to the conventional ultrasound group (23.53%) (P<0.05). The recurrence rate at 6-months (0.00% Conclusions: Compared with conventional ultrasound, CEUS-guided RFA is effective in treating BTNs, with smaller postoperative nodule volume, reduced occurrence of surgical complications, and reduced recurrence rate of thyroid nodules.
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.