ArticleScientific reports2024
Clinical experience with shear wave elastography (SWE) for assessing healthy uterus in a transabdominal approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Evaluation of stiffness values of normal uterine myometrium by 3T magnetic resonance elastography.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Investigation of Uterine Contractility and Myometrial Stiffness in Pelvic Organ Prolapse.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance and feasibility of transabdominal ultrasound shear wave elastography (SWE) in assessing sonoelastographic features of the uterus. Twenty-seven premenopausal women were enrolled between 2021 and 2022. Transabdominal SWE measured myometrial stiffness in various uterine segments. Additionally, tissue stiffness of the quadriceps femoris muscle and autochthonous back muscle was measured. Statistical analysis employed non-parametric tests, t test, and a robust mixed linear model. Stiffness values of the uterus and the two investigated muscle types exhibited a similar spectrum: 6.38 ± 2.59 kPa (median 5.61 kPa; range 2.76-11.31 kPa) for the uterine myometrium, 7.22 ± 1.24 kPa (6.82 kPa; 5.11-9.39 kPa) for the quadriceps femoris musle, and 7.43 ± 2.73 kPa (7.41 kPa; 3.10-13.73 kPa) for the autochthonous back muscle. A tendency for significant differences in myometrial stiffness was observed concerning the type of labor mode (mean stiffness of 9.17 ± 1.35 kPa after vaginal birth vs. 3.83 ± 1.35 kPa after Caesarian section, p = 0.01). No significant differences in myometrial stiffness were observed concerning age, BMI, previous pregnancies, uterine flexion and menstrual cycle phase. Transabdominal SWE of uterine stiffness seems to be a fast and practicable method in a clinical setting. Uterine stiffness appears to be largely independent of various factors, except for the mode of delivery. However, further studies are needed to validate these results.
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.