ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2024
Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in microwave ablation treatment of symptomatic focal uterine adenomyosis.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical observation of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for 1717 benign breast lesions: a multicenter study.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Safety of percutaneous microwave ablation under local anesthesia for uterine fibroids and adenomyosis.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Perspectives in transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- An Updated Review of Thermal Ablation Technology for Uterine Fibroids and Adenomyosis: Focusing on Protecting Fertility.International journal of women's health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in the ultrasound-guided microwave ablation (MWA) treatment of symptomatic focal uterine adenomyosis.
methodsThis retrospective study was conducted between March 2020 and January 2023, enrolling 52 patients with symptomatic focal uterine adenomyosis who had undergone MWA. All patients were examined with CEUS before and after MWA. The non-perfused volume (NPV) was compared between CEUS and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCEMRI) following ablation. Therapeutic efficacy and safety were evaluated at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Additionally, this study explored the correlations between pre-treatment CEUS features and a volume reduction ratio indicating sufficient ablation, defined as 50% or more at the 3-month follow-up.
resultsNo significant differences in NPV were noted between CEUS and DCE-MRI immediately after MWA and during follow-up (all P>0.05). At the 3-month follow-up, the median VRRs for the uterus and adenomyosis were 33.2% and 63.9%, respectively. Sufficient ablation was achieved in 69.2% (36/52) of adenomyosis cases, while partial ablation was observed in the remaining 30.8% (16/52). The identification of non-enhancing areas on pre-treatment CEUS was associated with sufficient ablation (P=0.016). At the 12-month follow-up, significant decreases were observed in both the uterine and adenomyosis volumes (all P<0.001). Dysmenorrhea and menorrhagia were significantly alleviated at 12 months, and no major complications were encountered.
conclusionCEUS can be used to evaluate the ablation zone of focal adenomyosis that has been treated with MWA, similarly to DCE-MRI. The identification of non-enhancing areas on pretreatment CEUS indicates satisfactory treatment outcomes.
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.