ArticleInternational journal of women's health2024
Differential Analysis of Pregnancy Outcomes After Treatment of HIFU and LEEP in Patients with Cervical High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Focused ultrasound treatment of cervical human papillomavirus infection and squamous intraepithelial lesions: A narrative review.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To verify whether there is lower incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes after high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment than loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in young women of childbearing age. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 46 patients treated with HIFU and 46 patients treated with LEEP. To compare the differences between the two groups, Fisher's exact test or the Kruskal-Wallis (K-W/H) test was used in the univariate analysis, while the logistic regression method was applied for further verification. Results: Basic characteristics showed no differences between the two groups (P > 0.05) except for parity (P < 0.001). Preterm birth rates were 6.52% and 0.00% in patients with cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) treated with LEEP and HIFU, respectively. The incidence rates of premature rupture of membranes (PROM) were respectively 15.22% and 21.74% in the two groups. There was no significant difference in pregnancy outcomes between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: This study is the first to compare the pregnancy outcomes of patients with cervical HSIL who treated with LEEP and HIFU procedures. Both HIFU treatment and LEEP are available options for patients of reproductive age with cervical HSIL. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct prospective single-center or multicenter randomized controlled studies.
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.