ReviewProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2024
A systematic review of the side effects of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of uterine fibroids.
Review in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 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.
- Application of high intensity focused ultrasound in the treatment of uterine fibroids in overweight/obese women.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- HIFU for leiomyoma treatment.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A new intervention called high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) targets fibroids with high-intensity ultrasound pulses using ultrasound probes. This noninvasive method, which can be carried out with either magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound guidance, results in immediate coagulated necrosis within a clearly defined area a few millimeters in diameter. Methods: This systematic review evaluated the safety of HIFU in the treatment of uterine fibroids regardless of site or size. We specifically aimed to determine the incidence of side effects that can occur during and after HIFU. We searched the PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Mendeley archive using only the terms HIFU and fibroid. After identifying 1077 studies of different types from 2014 to March 2024, 300 studies were screened and 60 included. Results: According to Society of Interventional Radiology guidelines, class A adverse events (AEs) showed no significant results, and individuals with these AEs required no treatment and had no long-term consequences. Similarly, there were no class B significant results. However, 3943 of 10,204 patients (38%) complained of lower abdominal pain after the procedure, a class B AE, which resolved by analgesics. Further, 153 of 24,700 patients (0.6%) had skin burns, blisters, or nodules, and these issues resolved with conservative treatment. Additionally, 74 of 23,741 patients (0.3%) had hematuria; 882 of 5970 patients (14.7%) had abnormal vaginal discharge; 414 of 23,449 (1.7%) had vaginal bleeding; and 267 of 7598 (3.5%) had leg paresthesia. Major AEs (class C and D) were almost nonexistent, and the incidence of death in our study was zero. Conclusion: HIFU ablation of uterine fibroids is generally safe, causing mostly mild side effects and very few severe complications. The relative safety of HIFU compared to other minimally invasive techniques, such as uterine artery embolization, still needs further evaluation.
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.