ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Application of strain elastography ultrasound to the endometrium of normal women.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. 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.
- A case of omental endometriosis complicated by hemorrhagic ascites leading to pelvic encapsulated effusion.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile there is a scarcity of studies utilizing strain elastography (SE) for the endometrium, commonly used gynecologic ultrasound instruments are equipped with built-in elastography modalities, primarily SE. With the objective of facilitating comprehensive examinations for gynecologic patients on a single ultrasound instrument, we undertook this study. Therefore, our aim was to study the value of SE ultrasonography in the assessment of endometrial elasticity in normal women.
methodsThree hundred and twenty normal women were recruited at our hospitals from November 2021 to December 2022. Each volunteer underwent a transvaginal two-dimensional (2D) and SE ultrasound during either the endometrial proliferative or secretory phase. The 2D ultrasound indices obtained included endometrial thickness, echo type (type A, B, and C), and blood flow grading (grades 0, 1, 2, and 3). SE indices obtained included endometrial strain values, myometrial strain values, and endometrial strain ratios. Differences in endometrial ultrasound indices between different menstrual cycles and different age groups were compared.
resultsComparison of 2D ultrasound parameters revealed that endometrial thickness in the proliferative phase endometrium group was smaller than that in the secretory phase endometrium group, with a statistically significant difference. Additionally, there was a statistically significant difference in endometrial echo types between the two groups, while the disparity in endometrial blood flow grading was not significant. Regarding SE parameters, the median and mean values of endometrial strain ratio in the proliferative phase endometrium group were smaller than those in the secretory phase endometrium group, showing a statistically significant difference. However, there were no significant differences observed between the two groups in endometrial strain and myometrial strain in the fundus. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any of the endometrial ultrasound indices among the different age groups.
conclusionsSE can reflect changes in endometrial stiffness in different menstrual cycles and is an important tool for assessing endometrial softness.
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.