A Joris, V Di Pietrantonio, J Praet, K Renard, A-C Verduyn, F Buxant, S Rozenberg
{"title":"随机试验:使用射频治疗更年期泌尿生殖系统综合征。","authors":"A Joris, V Di Pietrantonio, J Praet, K Renard, A-C Verduyn, F Buxant, S Rozenberg","doi":"10.1080/13697137.2024.2302425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>A randomized controlled study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency treatment in postmenopausal women not willing to use or presenting a contraindication for menopause hormone therapy (MHT) and suffering from genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective randomized open study evaluated the effect of radiofrequency treatment versus a gel (control group) in postmenopausal women suffering from GSM. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment for severity of vulvovaginal atrophy, dyspareunia, pH, vaginal smear maturation index, Vaginal Health Index and Female Sexual Function Index. The difference at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment and the difference in improvement were tested between groups by a two-sample <i>t</i>-test and the Mann-Whitney test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were only able to treat 48 patients (24 patients using radiofrequency and 24 patients using a gel). Globally, at the end of the study, there were no differences in changes of the measured outcomes between the group of women treated with radiofrequency and the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Radiofrequency treatment was found to be safe, but was not superior to a gel, although the study lacked power. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03857893).</p>","PeriodicalId":10213,"journal":{"name":"Climacteric","volume":" ","pages":"210-214"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randomized trial: treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause using radiofrequency.\",\"authors\":\"A Joris, V Di Pietrantonio, J Praet, K Renard, A-C Verduyn, F Buxant, S Rozenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13697137.2024.2302425\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>A randomized controlled study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency treatment in postmenopausal women not willing to use or presenting a contraindication for menopause hormone therapy (MHT) and suffering from genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective randomized open study evaluated the effect of radiofrequency treatment versus a gel (control group) in postmenopausal women suffering from GSM. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment for severity of vulvovaginal atrophy, dyspareunia, pH, vaginal smear maturation index, Vaginal Health Index and Female Sexual Function Index. The difference at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment and the difference in improvement were tested between groups by a two-sample <i>t</i>-test and the Mann-Whitney test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were only able to treat 48 patients (24 patients using radiofrequency and 24 patients using a gel). Globally, at the end of the study, there were no differences in changes of the measured outcomes between the group of women treated with radiofrequency and the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Radiofrequency treatment was found to be safe, but was not superior to a gel, although the study lacked power. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03857893).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Climacteric\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"210-214\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Climacteric\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2024.2302425\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Climacteric","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13697137.2024.2302425","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Randomized trial: treatment of genitourinary syndrome of menopause using radiofrequency.
Objective: A randomized controlled study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency treatment in postmenopausal women not willing to use or presenting a contraindication for menopause hormone therapy (MHT) and suffering from genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM).
Methods: A prospective randomized open study evaluated the effect of radiofrequency treatment versus a gel (control group) in postmenopausal women suffering from GSM. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment for severity of vulvovaginal atrophy, dyspareunia, pH, vaginal smear maturation index, Vaginal Health Index and Female Sexual Function Index. The difference at baseline and after 10-12 weeks of treatment and the difference in improvement were tested between groups by a two-sample t-test and the Mann-Whitney test.
Results: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we were only able to treat 48 patients (24 patients using radiofrequency and 24 patients using a gel). Globally, at the end of the study, there were no differences in changes of the measured outcomes between the group of women treated with radiofrequency and the control group.
Conclusion: Radiofrequency treatment was found to be safe, but was not superior to a gel, although the study lacked power. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03857893).
期刊介绍:
Climacteric is the official journal of the International Menopause Society (IMS). As an international peer-reviewed journal it publishes original research and reviews of all aspects of aging in women.
Climacteric was founded by the IMS in 1998 and today has become a leading journal in the publication of peer-reviewed papers on the menopause, climacteric and mid-life health. Topics covered include endocrine changes, symptoms attributed to the menopause and their treatment, hormone replacement and alternative therapies, lifestyles, and the counselling and education of peri- and postmenopausal women. Climacteric, published bimonthly, also features regular invited reviews, editorials and commentaries on recent developments.
The editorial review board of Climacteric includes leading scientific and clinical experts in the field of midlife medicine and research and is headed by its Editor-in-Chief, Professor Rod Baber of Australia. He and his team of Associate Editors act independently to set a clear editorial policy, co-ordinate peer review, and ensure a rapid response to submitted papers.