Laparoscopic surgery for pelvic pain associated with endometriosis

A review of phase II and III drugs for the treatment and management of endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent disease that gives rise to pelvic pain and infertility. Although estroprogestins and progestins currently stand as the first-line treatments for this condition, demonstrating efficacy in two-thirds of patients, a significant portion of individuals experience only partial relief or symptom recurrence following the cessation of these therapies. The coexistence of superficial, deep endometriosis, and ovarian endometriomas, as three distinct phenotypes with unique pathogenetic and molecular characteristics, may elucidate the current heterogeneous biological response to available therapy.

AREAS COVERED

The objective of this review is to furnish the reader with a comprehensive summary pertaining to phase II-III hormonal treatments for endometriosis.

EXPERT OPINION

Ongoing research endeavors are directed toward the development of novel hormonal options for this benign yet debilitating disease. Among them, oral GnRH antagonists emerge as a noteworthy option, furnishing rapid therapeutic onset without an initial flare-up; these drugs facilitate partial or complete estrogen suppression, and promote prompt ovarian function recovery upon discontinuation, effectively surmounting the limitations associated with previously employed GnRH agonists. Limited evidence supports the use of selective estrogen and progesterone receptor modulators. Consequently, further extensive clinical research is imperative to garner a more profound understanding of innovative targets for novel hormonal options.

Laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is associated with pain and infertility. Surgical interventions aim to remove visible areas of endometriosis and restore the anatomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of pain and infertility associated with endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

This review has drawn on the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group including searching the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group's specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, reference lists for relevant trials, and trial registries from inception to April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic surgery with any other laparoscopic or robotic intervention, holistic or medical treatment, or diagnostic laparoscopy only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed selection of studies, assessment of trial quality and extraction of relevant data with disagreements resolved by a third review author. We collected data for the core outcome set for endometriosis. Primary outcomes included overall pain and live birth. We evaluated the quality of evidence using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 RCTs. The studies randomised 1563 women with endometriosis. Four RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with diagnostic laparoscopy only. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic excision with diagnostic laparoscopy only. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with laparoscopic ablation or excision and uterine suspension. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection with diagnostic laparoscopy only. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation with diagnostic laparoscopy and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. Two RCTs compared laparoscopic ablation with laparoscopic excision. One RCT compared laparoscopic ablation or excision with helium thermal coagulator with laparoscopic ablation or excision with electrodiathermy. One RCT compared conservative laparoscopic surgery with laparoscopic colorectal resection of deep endometriosis infiltrating the rectum. Common limitations in the primary studies included lack of clearly described blinding, failure to fully describe methods of randomisation and allocation concealment, and poor reporting of outcome data. Laparoscopic treatment versus diagnostic laparoscopy We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment on overall pain scores compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only at six months (mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 1.49; 1 RCT, 16 participants; very low quality evidence) and at 12 months (MD 1.65, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.19; 1 RCT, 16 participants; very low quality evidence), where a positive value means pain relief (the higher the score, the more pain relief) and a negative value reflects pain increase (the lower the score, the worse the increase in pain). No studies looked at live birth. We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment on quality of life compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only: EuroQol-5D index summary at six months (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.18; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence), 12-item Short Form (SF-12) mental health component (MD 2.30, 95% CI -4.50 to 9.10; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence) and SF-12 physical health component (MD 2.70, 95% CI -2.90 to 8.30; 1 RCT, 39 participants; low quality evidence). Laparoscopic treatment probably improves viable intrauterine pregnancy rate compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only (odds ratio (OR) 1.89, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.86; 3 RCTs, 528 participants; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic treatment compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only on ectopic pregnancy (MD 1.18, 95% CI 0.10 to 13.48; 1 RCT, 100 participants; low quality evidence) and miscarriage (MD 0.94, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.54; 2 RCTs, 112 participants; low quality evidence). There was limited reporting of adverse events. No conversions to laparotomy were reported in both groups (1 RCT, 341 participants). Laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection versus diagnostic laparoscopy We are uncertain of the effect of laparoscopic ablation and uterine nerve transection on adverse events (more specifically vascular injury) compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.32; 1 RCT, 141 participants; low quality evidence). No studies looked at overall pain scores (at six and 12 months), live birth, quality of life, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. Laparoscopic ablation versus laparoscopic excision There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference in overall pain, measured at 12 months, for laparoscopic ablation compared with laparoscopic excision (MD 0.00, 95% CI -1.22 to 1.22; 1 RCT, 103 participants; very low quality evidence). No studies looked at overall pain scores at six months, live birth, quality of life, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage and adverse events. Helium thermal coagulator versus electrodiathermy We are uncertain whether helium thermal coagulator compared to electrodiathermy improves quality of life using the 30-item Endometriosis Health Profile (EHP-30) at nine months, when considering the components: pain (MD 6.68, 95% CI -3.07 to 16.43; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence), control and powerlessness (MD 4.79, 95% CI -6.92 to 16.50; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence), emotional well-being (MD 6.17, 95% CI -3.95 to 16.29; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence) and social support (MD 5.62, 95% CI -6.21 to 17.45; 1 RCT, 119 participants; very low quality evidence). Adverse events were not estimable. No studies looked at overall pain scores (at six and 12 months), live birth, viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound, ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only, it is uncertain whether laparoscopic surgery reduces overall pain associated with minimal to severe endometriosis. No data were reported on live birth. There is moderate quality evidence that laparoscopic surgery increases viable intrauterine pregnancy rates confirmed by ultrasound compared to diagnostic laparoscopy only. No studies were found that looked at live birth for any of the comparisons. Further research is needed considering the management of different subtypes of endometriosis and comparing laparoscopic interventions with lifestyle and medical interventions. There was insufficient evidence on adverse events to allow any conclusions to be drawn regarding safety.

Oral contraceptives for pain associated with endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition which affects many women of reproductive age worldwide and is a major cause of pain and infertility. The combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP) is widely used to treat pain occurring as a result of endometriosis, although the evidence for its efficacy is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of oral contraceptive preparations in the treatment of painful symptoms ascribed to the diagnosis of laparoscopically proven endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following from inception to 19 October 2017: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane CENTRAL Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP). We also handsearched reference lists of relevant trials and systematic reviews retrieved by the search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) of the use of COCPs in the treatment of women of reproductive age with symptoms ascribed to the diagnosis of endometriosis that had been made visually at a surgical procedure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. One review author was an expert in the content matter. We contacted study authors for additional information. The primary outcome was self-reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) at the end of treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials (612 women) met the inclusion criteria. Only three trials (404 women) provided data that were suitable for analysis.Combined oral contraceptive pill versus placeboTwo trials compared COCP with a placebo. These studies were at high risk of bias. For GRADE outcomes (self-reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) at the end of treatment), the quality of the evidence very low. Evidence was downgraded for imprecision as it was based on a single, small trial and for the visual analogue scale data there were wide confidence intervals (CIs). There appeared to have been substantial involvement of the pharmaceutical company funding the trials.Treatment with the COCP was associated with an improvement in self-reported pain at the end of treatment as evidenced by a lower score on the Dysmenorrhoea verbal rating scale (scale 0 to 3) compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) -1.30 points, 95% CI -1.84 to -0.76; 1 RCT, 96 women; very low quality evidence), a lower score on the Dysmenorrhoea visual analogue scale (no details of scale) compared with placebo (MD -23.68 points, 95% CI -28.75 to -18.62, 2 RCTs, 327 women; very low quality evidence) and a reduction in menstrual pain from baseline to the end of treatment (MD 2.10 points, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.82; 1 RCT, 169 women; very low quality evidence).Combined oral contraceptive pill versus medical therapiesOne underpowered trial compared the COCP with another medical treatment (goserelin). The study was at high risk of bias; the trial was unblinded and there was insufficient detail to judge allocation concealment and randomisation. For GRADE outcomes (self-reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) at the end of treatment), the quality of the evidence ranged from low to very low.At the end of treatment, the women in the goserelin group were amenorrhoeic and therefore no comparisons could be made between the groups for the primary outcome. At six months' follow-up, there was no clear evidence of a difference between women treated with the COCP and women treated with goserelin for measures of dysmenorrhoea on a visual analogue scale (scale 1 to 10) (MD -0.10, 95% CI -1.28 to 1.08; 1 RCT, 50 women; very low quality evidence) or a verbal rating scale (scale 0 to 3) (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.99 to 0.79; 1 RCT, 50 women; very low quality evidence). At six months' follow-up, there was no clear evidence of a difference between the COCP and goserelin groups for reporting complete absence of pain as measured by the visual analogue scale (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.02 to 8.43; 1 RCT, 50 women; very low quality evidence) or the verbal rating scale (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 1 RCT, 49 women; low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited evidence from two trials at high risk of bias and limited data for the prespecified outcomes for this review, there is insufficient evidence to make a judgement on the effectiveness of the COCP compared with placebo and the findings cannot be generalised.Based on the limited evidence from one small trial that was at high risk of bias, there is insufficient evidence to make a judgement on the effectiveness of the COCP compared with other medical treatments. Only one comparison was possible, with the medical intervention being goserelin, and the findings cannot be generalised.Further research is needed to fully evaluate the role of COCPs in managing pain-related symptoms associated with endometriosis. There are other formulations of the combined hormonal contraception such as the transdermal patch, vaginal ring or combined injectable contraceptives which this review did not cover but should be considered in future updates.

The effects and possible mechanisms of puerarin to treat endometriosis model rats

Objective. To explore the effects of puerarin to treat endometriosis (EMT) model rats and the possible regulatory mechanisms. Methods. EMT model rats were surgically induced by autotransplantion of endometrial tissues. The appropriate dosage of puerarin to treat EMT model rats was determined by observing the pathologic morphology of ectopic endometrial tissues and by detecting the levels of estradiol (E2) and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) of both serum and ectopic endometrial tissues. The related genes and proteins of ectopic endometrial tissues were analyzed by Real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry (IHC) to explore the possible mechanisms. Results. Puerarin could reduce the levels of E2 and PGE2 and prevent the growth of ectopic endometrium tissues by inhibiting the expression of aromatase cytochrome P450 (p450arom) and cyclooxygenase-2 (cox-2); puerarin could adjust the anabolism of E2 by upregulating the expression of 17β-hydroxysteroid-2 (17β-hsd-2) and downregulating the expression of 17β-hydroxysteroid-1 (17β-hsd-1) of the ectopic endometrium tissues; puerarin could increase the expression of ERβ and improve the inflammatory microenvironment of EMT model rats. Conclusions. Our data suggest that puerarin has a therapeutic effect on EMT model rats and could be a potential therapeutic agent for the treatment of EMT in clinic.

Treatment efficacy for pain complaints in women with endometriosis of the lesser pelvis after laparoscopic electroablation vs. CO2 laser ablation

Endometriosis is a chronic disease affecting mainly women of the reproductive age. Its most common manifestations include impaired fecundity, pelvic pain, and dyschezia. Laparoscopic removal of endometriotic foci remains to be the gold standard for the treatment of endometriosis. More effective techniques of endoscopic approach-among others, laser application-are continually being developed. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopic treatment with the use of CO2 laser ablation vs. electroablation with regard to pain complaints in the affected patients. The study included 48 women (aged 22-42) with varying degrees of endometriosis of the lesser pelvis. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) was used to evaluate pain intensity before the surgery in all patients, followed by either laser ablation or electroablation of the endometriotic foci. The results of the laparoscopic treatment were monitored after 3 and 6 months postoperatively. p value of 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Patients from both groups reported less intensive pain before/during menstruation (dysmenorrhea) 6 months postoperatively, with more distinct tendency in the electroablation group (p = 0.004) as compared to the laser ablation group (p = 0.025). Despite the initial improvement reported at the 3-month checkup (p = 0.008), 6 months postoperatively, a statistically significant increase in pain intensity was noted in both groups (p = 0.016 and p = 0.032 for CO2 laser ablation and electroablation, respectively). Both surgical methods seem to be effective only in the treatment of endometriosis-related dysmenorrhea, whereas the intensity of other pain complaints (dyspareunia, dysuria, dyschezia, pelvic pain syndrome (PPS)) has remained on the same level.

Impact of medical and surgical treatment of endometriosis on the cure of endometriosis and pain

This endometriosis study evaluates three different treatment strategies (hormonal medication, surgical, or combined treatment) and discusses the influence of endometriosis on the cure of this disease and pain relief. Four hundred and fifty patients with genital endometriosis, aged 18-44 years, were randomly distributed to three treatment groups at the first laparoscopy. They were reevaluated at a second-look laparoscopy (D 426/10), one to two months after the three-month hormonal therapy for groups 1 and 3 and five to six months later for group 2 (surgical treatment alone). Outcome data focussed on the recurrence of symptoms and pain. The three treatment options independent of the initial endoscopic endometriosis classification (EEC) stage including deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) achieved an overall cure rate of 50% or higher. The highest cure rate of 60% was achieved by the combined treatment, 55% by the exclusively hormonal therapy, and 50% by the exclusively surgical treatment. An overall pregnancy rate between 55% and 65% was achieved with no significant difference in relation to the therapeutical option.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery

BACKGROUND

Various options exist for treating endometriosis, including surgical, medical, such as ovarian suppression, or a combination of these strategies. Surgical treatment of endometriosis aims to remove visible areas of endometriosis. The aim of medical therapy is to inhibit growth of endometriotic implants by induction of a hypo-estrogenic state. Treatment with a hormone-releasing intrauterine device, using levonorgestrel (LNG-IUD), has also been suggested.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether postoperative LNG-IUD insertion in women with endometriosis improves pain and reduces recurrence of symptoms compared with no postoperative treatment, postoperative insertion of a placebo, or postoperative therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

The following databases were searched from inception to June 2012: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. EMBASE was searched from 2010 to June 2012. The citation lists of relevant publications, review articles, abstracts of scientific meetings, and included studies were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were included if they compared women undergoing surgical treatment for endometriosis with uterine preservation and then randomised within three months to LNG-IUD insertion versus no postoperative treatment, placebo (inert IUD), or other treatment. Diagnostic laparoscopy alone was not considered suitable treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data to allow for an intention-to-treat analysis. For dichotomous data, the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects method. For continuous data, the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI were calculated using the inverse variance random-effects method.

MAIN RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials were included. In two trials, there was a statistically significant reduction in the recurrence of painful periods in the LNG-IUD group compared with expectant management (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.60, 95 women, I(2) = 0%, moderate strength of evidence). The proportion of women who were satisfied with their treatment was also higher in the LNG-IUD group but did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.82, 95 women, I(2) = 0%). The number of women reporting a change in menstruation was significantly higher in the LNG-IUD group (RR 37.80, 95% CI 5.40 to 264.60, 95 women, I(2) = 0%) but the number of women not completing the allocated treatment did not differ between groups (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.25, I(2) = 43%).In one trial, women receiving LNG-IUD noted lower pain scores compared with women receiving gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists (MD -0.16, 95% CI -2.02 to 1.70, 40 women) but this did not reach statistical significance.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited but consistent evidence showing that postoperative LNG-IUD use reduces the recurrence of painful periods in women with endometriosis. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.

Accuracy of transvaginal sonography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance-colonography for the presurgical staging of deep infiltrating endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the accuracy of transvaginal sonography (TVS) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance-colonography (CE-MR-C) for the presurgical assessment of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

METHODS

Ninety women were enrolled prospectively for suspicion of DIE. All patients underwent TVS and CE-MR-C, with each operator blinded to the results of the other exam, before laparoscopy. The sites of DIE examined by both imaging techniques were: rectovaginal septum, pouch of Douglas, uterosacral ligaments, vesicouterine pouch, bowel, bladder and vagina. The presence of adhesions and the involvement of adnexa and of a previous abdominal scar, when there was clinical suspicion, were also evaluated. TVS and CE-MR-C findings were compared with laparoscopic and histological results.

RESULTS

Endometriosis was confirmed by laparoscopy in 95.6% (86/90) of cases. In 82.2% (74/90) of patients there was DIE. The global accuracy for TVS in the detection of DIE was 89.2%, sensitivity was 81.1%, specificity was 94.2%, positive predictive value was 89.6%, negative predictive value was 89.0%, the positive likelihood ratio was 13.9 and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.2. For CE-MR-C, these values were 87.2%, 71.1%, 97.1%, 93.7%, 84.6%, 24.4 and 0.3, respectively. CE-MR-C allowed diagnosis of all cases of bowel involvement; the accuracy for infiltration and stenosis was 100%. The accuracy of TVS for rectosigmoid nodules was 91.1% and that for infiltration was 88.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Both TVS and CE-MR-C showed satisfactory results for the presurgical assessment of DIE. TVS appears to be a powerful, simple, feasible, cost-effective tool for preoperative staging of DIE. CE-MR-C is an 'X-ray free' technique, which could be reserved for cases with deep infiltrating rectosigmoid lesions and for the prediction of stenosis and involvement of the upper part of the colon and small intestine.

Economic burden of surgically confirmed endometriosis in Canada

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the societal economic burden of illness caused by surgically confirmed endometriosis in Canada in 2009, including direct health care costs, lost productivity, and lost leisure time costs.

METHODS

Using a cross-sectional design, direct health care resource use data were obtained from nine family physicians and nine gynaecologists from across Canada, who were experienced in the treatment of women with surgically confirmed endometriosis. Data on alternative treatments and health care providers, as well as work absenteeism, lost leisure time, and caregiver time were obtained from a convenience sample of 27 women with endometriosis treated at two gynaecology clinics in Alberta and Quebec. Unit costs were assigned to resource use items for treatment-seeking patients, and total costs for each resource use item were aggregated to estimate the societal costs of endometriosis in Canada in 2009, across all prevalent cases of surgically confirmed endometriosis.

RESULTS

The estimated mean annual societal cost of endometriosis was $5,200 per patient (95% CI $3,700 to $7,100), with lost productivity and lost leisure time costs accounting for 78%. Extrapolating these figures yields an estimated total annual cost to Canadian society of $1.8 billion (95% CI $1.3 billion to $2.4 billion) attributable to surgically confirmed endometriosis in Canada.

CONCLUSION

For some women, surgically confirmed endometriosis has a substantial negative impact that can result in suffering to the individual and her family, and lead to substantial productivity losses. Understanding the interplay between direct costs, lost productivity, and quality of life is critical for accurately identifying and evaluating effective treatments for this condition.

Laparoscopic approach to acute abdomen from the Consensus Development Conference of the Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e nuove tecnologie (SICE), Associazione Chirurghi Ospedalieri Italiani (ACOI), Società Italiana di Chirurgia (SIC), Società Italiana di Chirurgia d'Urgenza e del Trauma (SICUT), Società Italiana di Chirurgia nell'Ospedalità Privata (SICOP), and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

In January 2010, the SICE (Italian Society of Endoscopic Surgery), under the auspices of the EAES, decided to revisit the clinical recommendations for the role of laparoscopy in abdominal emergencies in adults, with the primary intent being to update the 2006 EAES indications and supplement the existing guidelines on specific diseases.

METHODS

Other Italian surgical societies were invited into the Consensus to form a panel of 12 expert surgeons. In order to get a multidisciplinary panel, other stakeholders involved in abdominal emergencies were invited along with a patient's association. In November 2010, the panel met in Rome to discuss each chapter according to the Delphi method, producing key statements with a grade of recommendations followed by commentary to explain the rationale and the level of evidence behind the statements. Thereafter, the statements were presented to the Annual Congress of the EAES in June 2011.

RESULTS

A thorough literature review was necessary to assess whether the recommendations issued in 2006 are still current. In many cases new studies allowed us to better clarify some issues (such as for diverticulitis, small bowel obstruction, pancreatitis, hernias, trauma), to confirm the key role of laparoscopy (such as for cholecystitis, gynecological disorders, nonspecific abdominal pain, appendicitis), but occasionally previous strong recommendations have to be challenged after review of recent research (such as for perforated peptic ulcer).

CONCLUSIONS

Every surgeon has to develop his or her own approach, taking into account the clinical situation, her/his proficiency (and the experience of the team) with the various techniques, and the specific organizational setting in which she/he is working. This guideline has been developed bearing in mind that every surgeon could use the data reported to support her/his judgment.

Comparison between standard and reverse laparoscopic techniques for rectovaginal endometriosis

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare the surgical outcomes of standard and reverse laparoscopic techniques for the treatment of rectovaginal endometriosis.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in a teaching and research hospital (tertiary center), which included 75 women subjected to laparoscopic treatment of rectovaginal endometriosis that required both vaginal resection and rectal surgery. Standard and reverse laparoscopic techniques were compared in 35 and 40 women, respectively. Student's t test, Mann-Whitney test, and Fisher's exact test were performed to compare groups when needed; p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in operating time, blood loss, conversion rate, major intraoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and minor postoperative complications between the two techniques. The rate of major postoperative complications for the standard technique was 22.9%, whereas only 5% for the reverse technique (p = 0.02). The rate of postoperative rectovaginal fistula was the same for both techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Major postoperative complications were reduced by using the reverse technique.

Diagnosis and management of endometriosis: the role of the advanced practice nurse in primary care

PURPOSE

To discuss the etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of endometriosis for the advanced practice nurse (APN) in primary care.

DATA SOURCES

Selected research, clinical studies, clinical practice guidelines, and review articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Commonly encountered by the APN in primary care, endometriosis is a chronic, progressive inflammatory disease characterized by endometrial lesions, cysts, fibrosis, or adhesions in the pelvic cavity, causing chronic pelvic pain and infertility in women of reproductive age. Because of its frequently normal physical examination findings, variable clinical presentations, and nonspecific, overlapping symptoms with other conditions, endometriosis can be difficult to diagnose. As there currently are no accurate noninvasive diagnostic tests specific for endometriosis, it is imperative for the APN to become knowledgeable about the etiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and current treatment options of this disease.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The APN in primary care plays an essential role in health promotion through disease management and infertility prevention by providing support and much needed information to the patient with endometriosis. APNs can also facilitate quality of care and manage treatments effectively to improve quality of life, reduce pain, and prevent further progression of disease. Practice recommendations include timely diagnosis, pain management, infertility counseling, patient education, and support for quality of life issues.

Laparoscopic management of endometriosis: comprehensive review of best evidence

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive review of the best evidence available in the laparoscopic management of endometriosis for pain and/or fertility and to provide practical recommendations based on this information.

DESIGN

Review article of randomized controlled trials.

PATIENTS

Women with endometriosis.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of the Cochrane Library and MEDLINE database for randomized controlled trials relating only to laparoscopic management of endometriosis. The information from 7 Cochrane review articles and 35 original randomized trials is presented in a clinically relevant question-and-answer format.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of endometriosis as a disease with substantial morbidity is vitally important. Laparoscopic treatment of endometriosis is beneficial for reducing pain and improving fertility. Laparoscopic presacral neurectomy, but not laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation, is a useful adjunct to conservative surgery for endometriosis in patients with a midline component of pain. Preoperative hormonal suppression with gonadotropin-receptor hormone analogue may be helpful in decreasing endometriosis disease scores. Postoperative hormonal suppression with either a gonadotropin-receptor hormone analogue or progestin (including the levonorgestrel intrauterine system) may be helpful in reducing pain and increasing time to recurrence of symptoms. Excisional cystectomy is the preferred method to treat endometrial cysts for both pain and fertility and may be aided by the use of mesna and initial circular excision. An absorbable adhesion barrier (Interceed), 4% icodextrin solution (Adept), and a viscoelastic gel (Oxiplex/AP, FzioMed, Inc., San Luis Obispd, CA; not available in the United States) are safe and effective products to help prevent adhesions in laparoscopic surgery to treat endometriosis.

Anti-TNF-alpha treatment for deep endometriosis-associated pain: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is associated with an inflammatory response. Hence infliximab, an anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibody, might relieve pain.

METHODS

A randomized placebo-controlled trial was designed with 21 women with severe pain and a rectovaginal nodule of at least 1 cm. After 1 month of observation, three infusions of infliximab (5 mg/kg) or placebo were given. Surgery was performed 3 months later and follow-up continued for 6 months. The primary end-point was pain (dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia and non-menstrual pain) rated at each visit by the clinician and on a daily basis by the patient who in addition scored pain by visual analog pain scale and analgesia intake. Secondary end-points included the volume of the endometriotic nodule, pelvic tenderness and the visual appearance of endometriotic lesions at laparoscopy.

RESULTS

Pain severity decreased during the treatment by 30% in both the placebo (P < 0.001) and infliximab groups (P < 0.001). However, no effect of infliximab was observed for any of the outcome measures. After surgery, pain scores decreased in both groups to less than 20% of the initial value.

CONCLUSIONS

Infliximab appears not to affect pain associated with deep endometriosis. Treatment is associated with an important placebo effect. After surgery, pain decreases to less than 20%. Trials registration number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00604864.

Oral contraceptives for pain associated with endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition which affects many women of reproductive age worldwide and is a major cause of pain and infertility. The modern oral contraceptive pill is widely used to treat pain occurring as a result of endometriosis, although the evidence for its efficacy is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) in comparison to other treatments for painful symptoms of endometriosis in women of reproductive age.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2006); EMBASE (1980 to September 2006); National Research Register; and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All truly randomised controlled trials of the use of oral contraceptive pills in the treatment of women of reproductive age with symptoms ascribed to the diagnosis of endometriosis and made visually at surgical procedure were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study quality assessment and data extraction were carried out independently by two review authors. One of the assessors was an expert in the content matter. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Only one study met the inclusion criteria, in which a total of 57 women were allocated to two groups to compare an OCP to a GnRH analogue. Methods of randomisation and allocation concealment were unclear and the study was acknowledged by its authors to be underpowered. Women in the GnRH analogue group became amenorrhoeic during the treatment period of six months, whilst women in the OCP group reported a decrease in dysmenorrhoea. No evidence of a significant difference between the two groups was observed in terms of dysmenorrhoea at six months follow up after stopping treatment (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.08 to 2.90). Some evidence for a decrease in dyspareunia was found at the end of treatment in women in the GnRH analogue group, although no evidence of a significant difference in dyspareunia was observed at the end of the six months follow up (OR 4.87; 95% CI 0.96 to 24.65).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The limited data we found available suggests that this is no evidence of a difference in outcomes between the the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) studied and GnRH analogue was as effective as a GnRH analogue in treating for endometriosis-associated painful symptoms of endometriosis. However, the lack of studies with larger sample sizes, or focusing on other comparable treatments is concerning and further research is needed to fully evaluate fully the role of OCPs oral contraceptive pills in managing symptoms associated with ement of endometriosis.

Health technology assessment of surgical therapies for benign gynaecological disease

This chapter summarises the evidence of the benefits and harm of surgical therapies for benign gynaecological disease. We have limited the discussion in this chapter to three gynaecological conditions - menorrhagia, endometriosis and benign ovarian tumours - with a further section on the different surgical approaches for performing a hysterectomy for menorrhagia due to dysfunctional uterine bleeding and pelvic masses such as fibroids and benign adnexal masses. The currently available evidence suggests that there is little to choose between the four first-generation endometrial destruction techniques - laser ablation, transcervical resection of endometrium, vaporisation ablation and rollerball ablation - in terms of clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction. There is a paucity of evidence with regards to the comparison of the different second-generation endometrial-destruction techniques but current evidence suggests that bipolar radiofrequency ablation is more effective than thermal balloon ablation for treating menorrhagia. Overall, the second-generation techniques are at least as effective as first-generation methods but are easier to perform and can be done under local rather than general anaesthesia in some circumstances. Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation is an alternative to hysterectomy and should be offered to women with menorrhagia because of its high satisfaction rates, shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, earlier recovery and reduced postoperative complications; hysterectomy remains the surgical option of choice for women with intractable menorrhagia despite repeated endometrial ablations and for those who do not wish under any circumstances to continue to have menstrual bleeding. The combined use of laparoscopic laser ablation, adhesiolysis and uterine nerve ablation has been shown to have a beneficial effect on pelvic pain associated with mild to moderate endometriosis. Current evidence also supports the use of laparoscopic treatment of minimal and mild endometriosis to improve the on-going pregnancy and live birth rate in infertile patients. The current available evidence suggests that the laparoscopic approach is superior to laparotomy for the surgical management of benign ovarian cysts. It results in less postoperative pain and a shorter postoperative hospital stay; it also costs less. With regards to the surgical approach for performing a hysterectomy for menorrhagia and benign pelvic masses, vaginal hysterectomy should be performed over laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy when possible. Where it is not possible to perform the hysterectomy vaginally, then laparoscopic hysterectomy can be employed instead of abdominal hysterectomy to avoid a laparotomy scar. There appears to be no significant advantage in performing a subtotal hysterectomy instead of the total removal of the uterine corpus and cervix.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for symptomatic endometriosis following surgery

BACKGROUND

Various options exist for treating endometriosis, including ovarian suppression therapy, surgical treatment or a combination of these strategies. Surgical treatment of endometriosis sets out to remove visible areas of endometriosis and restore anatomy by division of adhesions. The aim of medical therapy is to inhibit growth of endometriotic implants by suppression of ovarian steroids and induction of a hypo-estrogenic state. Postoperative treatment with a hormone-releasing intrauterine system, using levonorgestrel (LNG-IUS), has been suggested.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if postoperative use of an LNG-IUS in women with endometriosis improves pain symptoms associated with menstruation and reduces recurrence compared with treatment with surgery only, placebo or systemic hormones.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following databases were searched: (1) Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials; (2) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 1); (3) MEDLINE (1966 to January 2006) and EMBASE (1980 to January 2006); (4) National Research Register (NRR). (5) The citation lists of relevant publications, review articles, abstracts of scientific meetings and included studies were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were included if they compared women undergoing any type of surgical treatment for endometriosis with uterine preservation then randomized to LNG-IUS insertion within two to three months versus no treatment, placebo (inert IUD) or systemic treatment. Diagnostic laparoscopy alone was excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (AM Abou-Setta and HG Al-Inany) independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the statistical guidelines developed by the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group. Data extracted from the trials was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. For binary data, the overall common odds ratio (OR) (that is, the odds of having clinical symptoms) and the risk difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method.

MAIN RESULTS

In one small randomized controlled trial (RCT) there was a statistically significant reduction in the recurrence of painful periods in the LNG-IUS group compared with the control group receiving a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (OR 0.14, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.75). The proportion of women who were satisfied with their treatment was higher in the LNG-IUS group than in the control group but this difference did not reach statistical difference (OR 3.00, 0.79 to 11.44).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

One small study has shown that postoperative use of the LNG-IUS reduces the recurrence of painful periods in women who have had surgery for endometriosis. There is a need for further well-designed RCTs of this approach.

Efficacy of laparoscopic excision of visually diagnosed peritoneal endometriosis in the treatment of chronic pelvic pain

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of laparoscopic excision of visually diagnosed endometriosis in the treatment of chronic pelvic pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Sixty-two women with chronic pelvic pain and who underwent laparoscopic excision of visually diagnosed peritoneal lesions suggestive of endometriosis returned postal questionnaires. The main outcomes measures were change in pelvic pain symptoms measured on a continuous and ordinal scale and patient satisfaction following treatment. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, time off work and use of health service resources.

RESULTS

42/62 (68%) women with an average follow up time of 13 months (range 6-38 months) returned completed outcome questionnaires. The mean amount of pelvic pain was reduced following surgery compared to immediately prior to treatment, regardless of the nature of the pain (P<0.05). Overall, 67% (95% CI 50-80%) of women reported improvement in pain symptoms and 71% (95% CI 55-84%) were satisfied with the results of treatment. Satisfaction with treatment was comparable whether the visual diagnosis of peritoneal endometriosis was confirmed histologically or not (62% versus 64%, P=1.0).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic excision of visually diagnosed endometriosis appears to be efficacious in the treatment of women with chronic pelvic pain. The launch of a long-term randomised controlled trial to confirm these provisional results is now required.

Laparoscopy for abdominal emergencies

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparoscopic exploration can be used to identify the causative pathology of acute abdominal pain. Laparoscopic surgery also allows treatment of many intraabdominal disorders. This report was prepared to describe the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared to laparotomy or nonoperative treatment.

METHODS

A panel of European experts in abdominal and gynecological surgery was assembled and participated in a consensus conference using Delphi methods. The aim was to develop evidence-based recommendations for the most common diseases that may cause acute abdominal pain.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Laparoscopic surgery was found to be clearly superior for patients with a presumable diagnosis of perforated peptic ulcer, acute cholecystitis, appendicitis, or pelvic inflammatory disease. In the emergency setting, laparoscopy is of unclear or limited value if adhesive bowel obstruction, acute diverticulitis, nonbiliary pancreatitis, hernia incarceration, or mesenteric ischemia are suspected. In stable patients with acute abdominal pain, noninvasive diagnostics should be fully exhausted before considering explorative surgery. However, diagnostic laparoscopy may be useful if no diagnosis can be found by conventional diagnostics. More clinical data are needed on the use of laparoscopy after blunt or penetrating trauma of the abdomen.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to diagnostic and therapeutic advantages, laparoscopic surgery is useful for the majority of conditions underlying acute abdominal pain, but noninvasive diagnostic aids should be exhausted first. Depending on symptom severity, laparoscopy should be advocated if routine diagnostic procedures have failed to yield results.

Is there an association between septate uterus and endometriosis?

BACKGROUND

The question of whether Müllerian anomalies are significantly more often combined with endometriosis is a controversially discussed problem. Some publications described this association in patients with obstructive but not non-obstructive Müllerian anomalies or controls without Müllerian anomalies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of endometriosis in patients with a septate uterus as a non-obstructive form of Müllerian anomalies.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, we evaluated 120 patients (29.4 +/- 4.7 years; mean +/- SD) with a septate uterus. The control group consisted of 486 consecutive infertile patients (30.8 +/- 6.3 years) with a normal hysteroscopy and laparoscopy.

RESULTS

The incidence of dysmenorrhoea was comparable in both groups, but the incidence of endometriosis was significantly higher in patients with a septate uterus (25.8 versus 15.2%, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest a higher incidence of endometriosis in patients with a septate uterus. If it can be confirmed by others, the initial finding of a septate uterus in infertile patients should be followed by a combined hysteroscopy and laparoscopy.

Laparoscopic excision of endometriosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect on pain and quality of life for women with all stages of endometriosis undergoing laparoscopic surgery compared with placebo surgery.

DESIGN

A randomized, blinded, crossover study.

SETTING

A tertiary referral unit in a district general hospital.

PATIENT(S)

Thirty-nine women with histologically proven endometriosis completed the 12-month study.

INTERVENTION(S)

Women were randomized to receive initially either a diagnostic procedure (the delayed surgical group) or full excisional surgery (the immediate surgery group). After 6 months, repeat laparoscopy was performed, with removal of any pathology present.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The end points were changes from baseline values of visual analogue pain scores, validated quality-of-life instruments (EQ-5D and SF-12), and sexual activity questionnaire scores. Patients and assessors of outcomes were blinded to the treatment-group assignment.

RESULT(S)

Significantly more of the 39 women operated on according to protocol reported symptomatic improvement after excisional surgery than after placebo: 16 of 20 (80%) vs. 6 of 19 (32%); chi(2)(1) = 9.3. Other aspects of quality of life were also significantly improved 6 months after excisional surgery but not after placebo. Progression of disease at second surgery was demonstrated for women having only an initial diagnostic procedure in 45% of cases, with disease remaining static in 33% and improving in 22% of cases. Nonresponsiveness to surgery was reported in 20% of cases.

CONCLUSION(S)

Laparoscopic excision of endometriosis is more effective than placebo at reducing pain and improving quality of life. Surgery is associated with a 30% placebo response rate that is not dependent on severity of disease. Approximately 20% of women do not report an improvement after surgery for endometriosis.

Understanding endometriosis is the key to successful therapeutic management

Understanding endometriosis on a molecular, biochemical, and genetic level will lead to better methods for the diagnosis and therapeutic management of this enigmatic disease.

Long-term effectiveness of presacral neurectomy for the treatment of severe dysmenorrhea due to endometriosis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term effectiveness of presacral neurectomy (PSN) in women with severe dysmenorrhea due to endometriosis treated with conservative laparoscopic surgical intervention.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).

SETTING

University-affiliated department of obstetrics and gynecology.

PATIENTS

One hundred forty-one sexually active women of reproductive age.

INTERVENTION

Conservative laparoscopic surgery without (group A) or with (group B) PSN.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

At entry and 24-months after surgical procedures, cure rates; frequency and severity of dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic pain; and quality of life were evaluated. At follow-up visit, the cure rate was significantly (P<0.05) higher in group B (83.3%) than in group A (53.3%). The frequency and severity of dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic pain were significantly (P<0.05) lower in both groups compared with baseline values, and only severity was significantly (P<0.05) lower in group B. A significant (P<0.05) improvement in quality of life was observed after surgery in both groups and was significantly (P<0.05) increased in group B compared with group A.

CONCLUSION

PSN improves long-term cure rates and quality of life in women treated with conservative laparoscopic surgery for severe dysmenorrhea due to endometriosis.

Evaluation of the Role of Laser Treatment for the Treatment of Pain in Endometriosis

There have been few appropriately conducted trials to evaluate the effectiveness of laser destruction of endometriosis in relieving pain symptoms, yet the techniques are increasingly being used. Laser destruction has been shown to be more effective than the placebo effect of laparoscopy alone in one trial, at least at 6-month follow-up. Longer-term studies suggest increasing recurrence of symptoms with time [23% at 12 months in one study, and 44% by a mean of 19.7 months (5-60) follow-up]. These recurrence rates are similar to those seen following 6 months medical treatment. It is unknown whether laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation (LUNA) in addition to destruction of lesions will produce better results, and appropriate trials are needed in several areas to determine the role of laser therapy.