A comparison of the cost-utility of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound and hysterectomy for adenomyosis: a retrospective study

X F Liu, Liu Xf, L H Huang, Huang Lh, Cai Zhang, C. Zhang, Huang GH, G H Huang, G-H Huang, Yan LM, L M Yan, Lm Yan, He J, Jia He, J He
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2017 · vol. 124(S3) , pp. 40–45 · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.14746 · PMID:28856866 · W2752711478
Observational OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 11 in-corpus citations
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-28 ⓘ

This retrospective study found that ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound and hysterectomy both significantly improve quality of life for adenomyosis patients, but USgHIFU is less costly.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU) and open hysterectomy for adenomyosis. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis. SETTING: Gynaecological department in a single centre in China. POPULATION: Patients with symptomatic adenomyosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost difference between patients with adenomyosis treated with USgHIFU and open hysterectomy. METHODS: Three hundred and sixty-eight patients with adenomyosis were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 302 patients were treated with USgHIFU and 66 patients with open hysterectomy. All of them had 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow ups. The patients' quality of life (QOL) was evaluated and the utility scores were obtained from a rating scale to conduct a cost-utility analysis (CUA). RESULTS: No significant differences were found at any follow-up time point in the QOL between the two groups (P > 0.05). After treatment, the QOL scores significantly increased in both groups (P < 0.05): the quality adjusted life year (QALY) for patients treated with USgHIFU was USUS$5256.48, whereas it was USUS$7510.03 for patients treated with open hysterectomy. Both incremental cost and sensitivity analysis showed that USgHIFU was less costly than open hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: The QOL of patients with adenomyosis can be significantly improved by either USgHIFU or open hysterectomy, but USgHIFU is less costly. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: USgHIFU can safely be used to treat patients with adenomyosis and significantly improved the quality of life of patients after treatment. The cost of USgHIFU is less than that of surgical treatment.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

adenomyosis

MeSH descriptors

Adenomyosis High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation Hysterectomy Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adult Adult Cost-Benefit Analysis Cost-Benefit Analysis Female Female High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation Humans Humans Hysterectomy

Citation neighborhood (2-hop)

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]

References (21)

Cited by (12)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-10-16T06:09:50.462052+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:20:29.702106+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK