[Clinical value of focused ultrasound ablation surgery in the treatment of abdominal wall endometriosis].

Objective: To explore the effectiveness and safety of focused ultrasound ablation surgery (FUAS) for abdominal wall endometriosis. Methods: From November 2019 to October 2022, a total of 34 patients with abdominal wall endometriosis who underwent FUAS were collected, and their clinical features, imaging features, intraoperative treatment and side effects after treatment were analyzed retrospectively, and the improvement of symptoms and re-intervention were followed up. Results: (1) Characteristics of clinical data: the average age of 34 patients with abdominal wall endometriosis was (32.8±3.8) years old. The largest diameter of the lesion was 48 mm, and the median lesion diameter was 24 mm. Thirty cases (88%, 30/34) had moderate to severe periodic pain in abdominal incision before FUAS. All patients were diagnosed by preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, including 19 cases (56%, 19/34) of superficial type, 8 cases (24%, 8/34) of intermediate type and 7 cases (21%, 7/34) of deep type. (2) FUAS treatment parameters: ablation was completed with average operation time of (64±18) minutes, average sonication time was (385±108) s, (103±11) W of average power, (38 819±16 309) J of average total energy, the average treatment area volume of (3.11±1.42) cm³, and (377.79±106.34) s/h of average treatment intensity. (3) Efficiency: the pain of patients after FUAS was significantly relieved, and the pain scores of patients after 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after FUAS were significantly decreased (Z=-4.66, -5.13, -5.11 and -4.91, all P<0.01). One year after FUAS, the near relief and effective pain relief rate was 74% (25/34), and the clinical effective rate was 85% (29/34). Five patients recurred after one year, including 3 patients who underwent abdominal wall endometriosis lesion resection and 2 patients who received drug treatment. One month after FUAS, the size of the lesion did not change significantly compared with that before FUAS (P>0.05), and the size of the lesion decreased significantly after FUAS at 3 months, 6 months and 1 year (Z=-2.15, -2.67 and -3.41, all P<0.05). It has no difference in pain relief among different types (P>0.05), but has significant difference in focus reduction among three types (P<0.01). (4) Safety: there were 34 cases (100%, 34/34) of skin burning sensation, 19 cases (56%, 19/34) of pain in the treatment area and 2 cases (6%, 2/34) of hematuria. All patients got better after corresponding treatments. Conclusion: FUAS is safe and effective for the treatment of abdominal wall endometriosis, which has clinical application value.