ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2026
Efficacy and Safety of Radiofrequency as a Treatment Modality for Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in International urogynecology journal, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisExisting treatment approaches to genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) have constrained patient adherence. Radiofrequency (RF) therapy may address this issue. In this study we seek to assess the efficacy and safety of RF therapy in comparison with other interventions for the management of GSM.
methodsWe performed pertinent literature searches in the Cochrane Library, Medline, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases utilizing specific keywords. Continuous variables were aggregated into the mean difference (MD), whereas dichotomous variables were aggregated into odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) utilizing random-effects models.
resultsA total of eight randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Our pooled analysis demonstrated a more significant enhancement in the total Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) score among patients with GSM undergoing RF therapy in comparison with those receiving vaginal estrogen (MD -5.57; 95% CI 2.42, 8.72; p = 0.0005) and placebo/moisturizer (MD 4.57; 95% CI 1.02, 8.12; p = 0.01). Nonetheless, RF therapy exhibited no substantial disparity in the total FSFI score whenever compared with laser therapy (MD 0.45; 95% CI -3.28, 4.17; p = 0.81). In terms of the Vaginal Health Index, RF therapy showed no significant difference compared with vaginal estrogen (p = 0.50), laser therapy (p = 0.97), and even with placebo/moisturizer (p = 0.14). The reported adverse events (AEs) were solely mild, with no serious AEs noted.
conclusionsRadiofrequency therapy was associated with significantly greater improvement in sexual function than vaginal estrogen and placebo/moisturizer, but comparable with laser therapy. Vaginal health outcomes were similar across all comparators. Adverse events were exclusively mild, supporting an acceptable safety profile.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42530648What 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.