ReviewGynecology and minimally invasive therapy
Treatment Options for Uterine Fibroids Using Microwave and Radiofrequency.
Review in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Minimally invasive thermal ablation therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), have emerged as effective alternatives to traditional surgical approaches for the management of symptomatic uterine fibroids. These techniques offer advantages such as reduced pain, minimal blood loss, and quicker recovery times. This mini-review integrates current evidence with clinical experience to evaluate the efficacy, safety, procedural characteristics, and cost-effectiveness of MWA and RFA, with additional comparisons to high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Two clinical cases are presented to illustrate the application and outcomes of combining MWA or RFA with hysteroscopic resection. Available data suggest that MWA provides the shortest treatment duration and broad applicability, while RFA offers high ablation rates, especially for large or hypervascular fibroids. In contrast, HIFU is noninvasive and better tolerated but requires longer procedural time and has more stringent patient selection criteria. Treatment decisions should be individualized based on fibroid characteristics, patient preferences, and available resources. With appropriate patient selection and procedural expertise, these minimally invasive methods can significantly improve symptom control and quality of life.
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.