The treatment of plantar warts using microwave—A review of 85 consecutive cases in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Plantar warts (verrucae plantaris) are a common source of pain for patients and are often refractory to treatment. Previous work has shown a high clearance rate of verrucae using a surface-based microwave device (Swift®). AIMS: To assess the efficacy, defined as the complete visible clearance of warts, in patients with verrucae plantaris receiving microwave treatment. PATIENTS: We undertook a retrospective review and identified records of 85 patients who underwent a course of microwave treatment at a single US-based podiatry centre. Efficacy was analyzed on the basis on intention-to-treat. RESULTS: In patients who received ≥1 session there was a complete clearance rate of 60.0% (51/85) (intention-to-treat; 59 patients completed treatment, 26 lost to follow-up) and 86.4% (51/59) per treatment completion; no significant differences in clearance rates of children and adults were observed (61.0% [25/41] vs. 59.1% [26/44]). There were 31 patients who received three sessions of microwave therapy with a clearance rate of 71.0% (22/31) as per intention-to-treat (27 patients completed treatment, 4 lost to follow-up). An average of 2.3 sessions (SD: 1.1; range: 1-6) was required for the complete clearance of plantar warts. Complete clearance was also observed in some patients with recalcitrant warts following additional treatment sessions (42.9% [3/7]). A significant reduction in wart related pain was reported for all patients undergoing treatment. Some patients continued to report a reduced amount of pain post-therapy compared with pretherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Microwave treatment of verrucae plantaris appears to be a safe and effective procedure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".