Comparison of efficacy and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound at different powers for patients with vulvar lichen simplex chronicus

Figures & data

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of patients with VLSC.

Variables	Low-power group (n = 70)	Control group (n = 82)	p-value
Age, years	41.6 ± 12.2	41.8 ± 11.3	.94
Course, years	2 (1, 5)	2 (1, 8)	.86
Menopause			.68
Post-menopause	20 (28.6)	26 (31.7)
Pre-menopause	50 (71.4)	56 (68.3)
Symptoms			.40
Mild	4 (5.7)	2 (2.4)
Moderate	14 (20.0)	22 (26.9)
Severe	52 (74.3)	58 (70.7)
Lesion size/vulva size			.76
<30%	20 (28.6)	28 (34.1)
30–50%	32 (45.7)	34 (41.5)
>50%	18 (25.7)	20 (24.4)

Values are given as n (%) unless otherwise stated.

Table 2. Comparison of treatment parameters and short-term complications between the two groups.

Variables	Low-power group (n = 70)	Control group (n = 82)	p-value
Sessions of HIFU	1	1
Success of HIFU	70 (100)	82 (100)
Sonication time, min	21.0 ± 6.0	18.2 ± 5.7	.04
Treatment energy, J	4022.4 ± 1188.8	4435.4 ± 1615.6	.23
Adverse effects
Blisters	7 (10.0)	19 (23.3)	.04
Ulcer	1 (1.4)	4(4.9)	.23

Values are given as n (%) unless otherwise stated.

Figure 1. Local skin burns of one patient with VLSC after HIFU treatment.

Table 3. Comparison of efficacy between the two groups after HIFU therapy.

Variables	Low-power group (n = 70)	Control group (n = 82)	p-value
One month after HIFU			.35
Curative	46 (65.7)	62 (75.6)
Effective	14 (20)	10 (12.2)
Ineffective	10 (14.3)	10 (12.2)
Six months after HIFU			.65
Curative	42 (60.0)	54 (65.9)
Effective	14 (20.0)	12 (14.6)
Ineffective	14 (20.0)	16 (19.5)
Recurrence	4 (5.7)	8 (9.8)	.36
Twelve months after HIFU			.73
Curative	30 (42.9)	40 (48.8)
Effective	26 (37.1)	26 (31.7)
Ineffective	14 (20.0)	16 (19.5)
Recurrence	16 (22.9)	22 (26.8)	.57

Values are given as n (%) unless otherwise stated.