Wenyi Zhang1, Min He2,3, Guohua Huang4,3, Jia He3. 1. a Marshall College , University of California , San Diego, La Jolla , California , USA ; 2. b Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , Daping Hospital of the Third Military Medical University , Chongqing , China ; 3. d Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , Suining Central Hospital , Sichuan , China. 4. c State Key Laboratory of Ultrasound Engineering in Medicine Co-founded by Chongqing and the Ministry of Science and Technology, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Ultrasound in Medicine and Engineering, College of Biomedical Engineering , Chongqing Medical University , Chongqing , China ;
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the treatment outcomes of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) for uterine fibroids in patients with an anteverted uterus versus a retroverted uterus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the principles of statistics we enrolled 221patients with an anteverted uterus and 221 with a retroverted uterus. All patients had a solitary uterine fibroid and every fibroid was identified as hypointense on the T2 weighted images (T2WI) on magnetic resonance. The baseline characteristics of the patients, treatment results and adverse events were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The average non-perfused volume ratio of fibroids was 85.2 ± 18.7% in the group of patients with a retroverted uterus, while it was 87.7 ± 11.8% in patients with an anteverted uterus (P < 0.05). The fibroids in patients with a retroverted uterus were treated using lower sonication power and longer sonication time. During the procedure patients with a retroverted uterus had a higher incidence of sciatic/buttock pain and groin pain, while patients with an anteverted uterus complained of lower abdominal pain or a burning sensation on the skin. Immediately after USgHIFU, the rates of sciatic/buttock pain and skin burn were significantly higher in patients with a retroverted uterus. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicated that uterine fibroids with hypointensity on T2WI in a retroverted uterus can be safely and effectively treated with USgHIFU. However, the fibroids in an anteverted uterus are easier to treat with USgHIFU.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the treatment outcomes of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) for uterine fibroids in patients with an anteverted uterus versus a retroverted uterus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the principles of statistics we enrolled 221patients with an anteverted uterus and 221 with a retroverted uterus. All patients had a solitary uterine fibroid and every fibroid was identified as hypointense on the T2 weighted images (T2WI) on magnetic resonance. The baseline characteristics of the patients, treatment results and adverse events were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The average non-perfused volume ratio of fibroids was 85.2 ± 18.7% in the group of patients with a retroverted uterus, while it was 87.7 ± 11.8% in patients with an anteverted uterus (P < 0.05). The fibroids in patients with a retroverted uterus were treated using lower sonication power and longer sonication time. During the procedure patients with a retroverted uterus had a higher incidence of sciatic/buttock pain and groin pain, while patients with an anteverted uterus complained of lower abdominal pain or a burning sensation on the skin. Immediately after USgHIFU, the rates of sciatic/buttock pain and skin burn were significantly higher in patients with a retroverted uterus. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicated that uterine fibroids with hypointensity on T2WI in a retroverted uterus can be safely and effectively treated with USgHIFU. However, the fibroids in an anteverted uterus are easier to treat with USgHIFU.
Authors: Lifei Zhu; Ari Partanen; Michael R Talcott; H Michael Gach; Suellen C Greco; Lauren E Henke; Jessika A Contreras; Imran Zoberi; Dennis E Hallahan; Hong Chen; Michael B Altman Journal: Int J Hyperthermia Date: 2019 Impact factor: 3.914
Authors: Lazzaro di Biase; Emma Falato; Maria Letizia Caminiti; Pasquale Maria Pecoraro; Flavia Narducci; Vincenzo Di Lazzaro Journal: Neurol Res Int Date: 2021-06-29