Pentoxifylline After Conservative Surgery for Endometriosis: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

A systematic literature review on patient-reported outcome domains and measures in nonsurgical efficacy trials related to chronic pain associated with endometriosis: an urgent call to action

ABSTRACT

Endometriosis, a common cause for chronic pelvic pain, significantly affects quality of life, fertility, and overall productivity of those affected. Therapeutic options remain limited, and collating evidence on treatment efficacy is complicated. One reason could be the heterogeneity of assessed outcomes in nonsurgical clinical trials, impeding meaningful result comparisons. This systematic literature review examines outcome domains and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in clinical trials. Through comprehensive search of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up until July 2022, we screened 1286 records, of which 191 were included in our analyses. Methodological quality (GRADE criteria), information about publication, patient population, and intervention were assessed, and domains as well as PROMs were extracted and analyzed. In accordance with IMMPACT domain framework, the domain pain was assessed in almost all studies (98.4%), followed by adverse events (73.8%). By contrast, assessment of physical functioning (29.8%), improvement and satisfaction (14.1%), and emotional functioning (6.8%) occurred less frequently. Studies of a better methodological quality tended to use more different domains. Nevertheless, combinations of more than 2 domains were rare, failing to comprehensively capture the bio-psycho-social aspects of endometriosis-associated pain. The PROMs used showed an even broader heterogeneity across all studies. Our findings underscore the large heterogeneity of assessed domains and PROMs in clinical pain-related endometriosis trials. This highlights the urgent need for a standardized approach to both, assessed domains and high-quality PROMs ideally realized through development and implementation of a core outcome set, encompassing the most pivotal domains and PROMs for both, stakeholders and patients.

Acupuncture for pain and pain-related disability in deep infiltrating endometriosis

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture in relieving symptoms (dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, pelvic pain and dyschezia) intensity, improving functional disability, reducing the number of days per months of dysmenorrhea, the frequency and the efficacy of analgesic use in deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE). The safety profile was also evaluated.

Methods

The study sample was 34 patients with DIE; for 2 months (T-2, T-1) the women recorded diary notes on the numbers of days of menstruation, the presence, intensity, and disability related to dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, pelvic pain, and dyschezia. They then received a total of 15 acupuncture treatments over 6 months (T1-T6; once a week for 12 weeks, then once a month for 3 months).

Results

Dysmenorrhea intensity was decreased during treatment. A decrease of at least 50% in number of days of dysmenorrhea, and a decrease in moderate-to-severe disability starting from T1 to T6 was recorded for 58.6% of patients. Dyspareunia intensity steadily decreased starting at T2; the percentage of women with moderate-to-severe disability declined from 73.3% at T-2, to 36.9% at T3, T4, and T5. A decrease in pelvic pain score was noted starting at T1; the percentage of disability decreased from 83.3% at T-2 to 33.3% at T3 and T6. The intensity of dyschezia decreased from T-2 to T3 and T4 and then increased slightly. Analgesic drug use was lower during treatment and its efficacy appeared to be greater.

Conclusions

The limitations notwithstanding our study-findings show that acupuncture was safe and effective in reducing pain intensity and symptoms-related disability. Larger-scale studies are needed to compare acupuncture and pharmacotherapy for endometriosis-related pain.

Treatment of endometriosis: a review with comparison of 8 guidelines

Background

Endometriosis, the presence of endometrial-like tissue outside the uterus, is a common clinical entity between women of reproductive age, with a prevalence of about 10%. Due to the variety of endometriosis-associated symptoms, a great variety of treatments have been implemented. The aim of this review is to give an overview on therapeutical approaches of eight national and international widely used guidelines.

Methods

Six national (College National des Gynecologues et Obstetriciens Francais, National German Guideline (S2k), Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, American College of Obstetricians (ACOG) and Gynecologists, American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) and National Institute for Health and Care (NICE) and two international (World Endometriosis Society, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology) guidelines are included in this review.

Conclusion

All the above-mentioned guidelines agree that the combined oral contraceptive pill, progestogens are therapies recommended for endometriosis associated pain. Concerning infertility, there is no clear consensus about surgical treatment. Discrepancies are also found on recommendation of the second- and third-line treatments.

Pentoxifylline for the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain and infertility

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory condition that occurs during the reproductive years. It is characterised by endometrium-like tissue developing outside the uterine cavity. This endometriotic tissue development is dependent on oestrogen produced primarily by the ovaries and partially by the endometriotic tissue itself, therefore traditional management has focused on ovarian suppression. In this review we considered the role of modulation of the immune system as an alternative approach. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of pentoxifylline in the management of endometriosis.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and AMED on 16 December 2020, together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pentoxifylline with placebo or no treatment, other medical treatment, or surgery in women with endometriosis. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and overall pain (as measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain, other validated scales, or dichotomous outcomes) per woman randomised. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, rate of recurrence, and adverse events resulting from the pentoxifylline intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies against the inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias, consulting a third review author where required. We contacted study authors as needed. We analysed dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RRs), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and a fixed-effect model. For small numbers of events, we used a Peto odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI instead. We analysed continuous outcomes using the mean difference (MD) between groups presented with 95% CIs. We used the I2 statistic to evaluate heterogeneity amongst studies. We employed the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five parallel-design RCTs involving a total of 415 women. We included one additional RCT in this update. Three studies did not specify details relating to allocation concealment, and two studies were not blinded. There were also considerable loss to follow-up, with four studies not conducting intention-to-treat analysis. We judged the quality of the evidence as very low. Pentoxifylline versus placebo No trials reported on our primary outcomes of live birth rate and overall pain. We are uncertain as to whether pentoxifylline treatment affects clinical pregnancy rate when compared to placebo (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.10; 3 RCTs, n = 285; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). The evidence suggests that if the clinical pregnancy rate with placebo is estimated to be 20%, then the rate with pentoxifylline is estimated as between 18% and 43%. We are also uncertain as to whether pentoxifylline affects the recurrence rate of endometriosis (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.36; 1 RCT, n = 121; very low-quality evidence) or miscarriage rate (Peto OR 1.99, 95% CI 0.20 to 19.37; 2 RCTs, n = 164; I2 = 0%; very low-quality evidence). No trials reported on the effect of pentoxifylline on improvement of endometriosis-related symptoms other than pain or adverse events. Pentoxifylline versus no treatment No trials reported on live birth rate. We are uncertain as to whether pentoxifylline treatment affects overall pain when compared to no treatment at one month (MD -0.36, 95% CI -2.12 to 1.40; 1 RCT, n = 34; very low-quality evidence), two months (MD -1.25, 95% CI  -2.67 to 0.17; 1 RCT, n = 34; very low-quality evidence), or three months (MD -1.60, 95% CI -3.32 to 0.12; 1 RCT, n = 34; very low-quality evidence). No trials reported on adverse events caused by pentoxifylline or any of our other secondary outcomes. Pentoxifylline versus other medical therapies One study (n = 83) compared pentoxifylline to the combined oral contraceptive pill after laparoscopic surgery to treat endometriosis, but could not be included in the meta-analysis as it was unclear if the data were presented as +/- standard deviation and what the duration of treatment was. No trials reported on adverse events caused by pentoxifylline or any of our other secondary outcomes. Pentoxifylline versus conservative surgical treatment  No study reported on this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No studies reported on our primary outcome of live birth rate. Due to the very limited evidence, we are uncertain of the effects of pentoxifylline on clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, or overall pain. There is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of pentoxifylline in the management of women with endometriosis with respect to subfertility and pain relief outcomes.

Role of inflammation in benign gynecologic disorders: from pathogenesis to novel therapies†

Emerging evidence supports the notion that inflammation fosters the development of common benign gynecologic disorders, including uterine leiomyoma, endometriosis, and adenomyosis. Numerous cytokines, chemokines, and growth and transcription factors have indisputable roles in the establishment and maintenance of benign gynecologic disorders by initiating complex cascades that promote proliferation, angiogenesis, and lesion progression. The interaction between inflammation and benign gynecologic disorders is orchestrated by a plethora of factors, including sex steroids, genetics, epigenetics, extracellular matrix, stem cells, cardiometabolic risk factors, diet, vitamin D, and the immune system. The role of inflammation in these disorders is not limited to local pathobiology but also extends to involve clinical sequelae that range from those confined to the reproductive tract, such as infertility and gynecologic malignancies, to systemic complications such as cardiovascular disease. Enhanced understanding of the intricate mechanisms of this association will introduce us to unvisited pathophysiological perspectives and guide future diagnostic and therapeutic implications aimed at reducing the burden of these disorders. Utilization of inflammatory markers, microRNA, and molecular imaging as diagnostic adjuncts may be valuable, noninvasive techniques for prompt detection of benign gynecologic disorders. Further, use of novel as well as previously established therapeutics, such as immunomodulators, hormonal treatments, cardiometabolic medications, and cyclooxygenase-2 and NF-κB inhibitors, can target inflammatory pathways involved in their pathogenesis. In this comprehensive review, we aim to dissect the existing literature on the role of inflammation in benign gynecologic disorders, including the proposed underlying mechanisms and complex interactions, its contribution to clinical sequelae, and the clinical implications this role entails.

Antioxidants for female subfertility

BACKGROUND

A couple may be considered to have fertility problems if they have been trying to conceive for over a year with no success. This may affect up to a quarter of all couples planning a child. It is estimated that for 40% to 50% of couples, subfertility may result from factors affecting women. Antioxidants are thought to reduce the oxidative stress brought on by these conditions. Currently, limited evidence suggests that antioxidants improve fertility, and trials have explored this area with varied results. This review assesses the evidence for the effectiveness of different antioxidants in female subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether supplementary oral antioxidants compared with placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant improve fertility outcomes for subfertile women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases (from their inception to September 2019), with no language or date restriction: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED. We checked reference lists of relevant studies and searched the trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment or treatment with another antioxidant, among women attending a reproductive clinic. We excluded trials comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and trials that only included fertile women attending a fertility clinic because of male partner infertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary review outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 trials involving 7760 women. Investigators compared oral antioxidants, including: combinations of antioxidants, N-acetylcysteine, melatonin, L-arginine, myo-inositol, carnitine, selenium, vitamin E, vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin D+calcium, CoQ10, and omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids versus placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant. Only 27 of the 63 included trials reported funding sources. Due to the very low-quality of the evidence we are uncertain whether antioxidants improve live birth rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (odds ratio (OR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.43; P < 0.001, I² = 29%; 13 RCTs, 1227 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live birth rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 24% and 36%. Low-quality evidence suggests that antioxidants may improve clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.89; P < 0.001, I² = 63%; 35 RCTs, 5165 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 19%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 25% and 30%. Heterogeneity was moderately high. Overall 28 trials reported on various adverse events in the meta-analysis. The evidence suggests that the use of antioxidants makes no difference between the groups in rates of miscarriage (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.55; P = 0.46, I² = 0%; 24 RCTs, 3229 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of multiple pregnancy (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.56; P = 0.99, I² = 0%; 9 RCTs, 1886 women; low-quality evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates of gastrointestinal disturbances (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.10; P = 0.47, I² = 0%; 3 RCTs, 343 women; low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence showed that there was also no difference between the groups in rates of ectopic pregnancy (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.20; P = 0.69, I² = 0%; 4 RCTs, 404 women). In the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison, low-quality evidence shows no difference in a lower dose of melatonin being associated with an increased live-birth rate compared with higher-dose melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live-birth rate of 24%, the rate among women using a lower dose of melatonin compared to a higher dose would be between 12% and 40%. Similarly with clinical pregnancy, there was no evidence of a difference between the groups in rates between a lower and a higher dose of melatonin (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.15; P = 0.89, I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 140 women). Three trials reported on miscarriage in the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison (two used doses of melatonin and one compared N-acetylcysteine versus L-carnitine). There were no miscarriages in either melatonin trial. Multiple pregnancy and gastrointestinal disturbances were not reported, and ectopic pregnancy was reported by only one trial, with no events. The study comparing N-acetylcysteine with L-carnitine did not report live birth rate. Very low-quality evidence shows no evidence of a difference in clinical pregnancy (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.00; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). Low quality evidence shows no difference in miscarriage (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42 to 5.67; 1 RCT, 164 women; low-quality evidence). The study did not report multiple pregnancy, gastrointestinal disturbances or ectopic pregnancy. The overall quality of evidence was limited by serious risk of bias associated with poor reporting of methods, imprecision and inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review, there was low- to very low-quality evidence to show that taking an antioxidant may benefit subfertile women. Overall, there is no evidence of increased risk of miscarriage, multiple births, gastrointestinal effects or ectopic pregnancies, but evidence was of very low quality. At this time, there is limited evidence in support of supplemental oral antioxidants for subfertile women.

New therapeutic approaches for endometriosis besides hormonal therapy

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Objective:

Endometriosis is a common gynecologic disease that frequently leading to chronic pelvic pain, severe dysmenorrhea, and subfertility. As first-line hormonal treatment can interfere with ovulation and may cause recurrent pelvic pain, exploration of new non-hormonal therapeutic approaches becomes increasingly necessary. This review aimed to evaluate the pre-clinical and clinical efficacy and safety of non-hormonal treatment for endometriosis

Data sources:

Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, SINOMED, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar were searched up to October 2019, using search terms “endometriosis” and “non-hormonal therapy.”

Study selection:

Twenty-four articles were reviewed for analysis, including nine animal studies and 15 human trials; all were published in English.

Results:

Twenty-four articles were identified, including 15 human trials with 861 patients and nine animal studies. Some agents have been evaluated clinically with significant efficacy in endometriosis-related pelvic pain and subfertility, such as rofecoxib, etanercept, pentoxifylline, N-palmitoylethanolamine, resveratrol, everolimus, cabergoline (Cb2), and simvastatin. Other drugs with similar pharmacological properties, like parecoxib, celecoxib, endostatin, rapamycin, quinagolide, and atorvastatin, have only been tested in animal studies.

Conclusions:

Clinical data about most of the non-hormonal agents are not sufficient to support them as options for replacement therapy for endometriosis. In spite of this, a few drugs like pentoxifylline showed strong potential for real clinical application.

The Effect of Preoperative Pentoxifylline on Postoperative Pain and Development of Secondary Hyperalgesia in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Appendectomy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial Study

BACKGROUND

After surgery and loss of anesthetic effect, postoperative pain can annoy the patient and affect patient satisfaction with treatment. This study was aimed at evaluating the effect of preoperative pentoxifylline (PTX) on postoperative pain and development of secondary hyperalgesia in patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy (LA).

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial study was conducted on 91 eligible subjects with acute appendicitis referred to Shahid Beheshti hospital of Sabzevar, Iran, in 2018. The intervention and control groups were administered with a single oral dose of PTX (10 mg/kg) and placebo an hour before surgery, respectively. Postoperative pain was measured within 24 hours after surgery using a VAS, and the area of secondary hyperalgesia was measured 24 hours after surgery using the Stubhaug et al. method.

RESULTS

The mean age of the subjects was 26.74 ± 9.99 years, and 57.14% were female. Pain intensity during rest was significantly greater in the control group as compared to the PTX group 24 hours after surgery (VAS scores 2.19 ± 0.49 and 3.13 ± 0.66, respectively; P < 0.001). Moreover, pain intensity during cough was substantially lower in the PTX group compared with the control group 24 hours after surgery (VAS scores 2.65 ± 1.90 and 4.10 ± 2.60, respectively; P = 0.003 in turn). The dynamic hyperalgesia was significantly greater in the control group as compared with the PTX group (3.80 ± 1.82 and 7.43 ± 2.38, respectively; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that oral administration of PTX 1 hour before surgery in patients undergoing LA can reduce postoperative pain in patients and prevent secondary hyperalgesia at a surgical site.

Is Scientific Medical Literature Related to Endometriosis Treatment Evidence-Based? A Systematic Review on Methodological Quality of Randomized Clinical Trials

Background and objectives: Informed decision-making requires the ability to identify and integrate high-quality scientific evidence in daily practice. We aimed to assess whether randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on endometriosis therapy follow methodological criteria corresponding to the RCTs' specific level in the hierarchy of evidence in such details to allow the reproduction and replication of the study. Materials and Methods: Using the keywords "therapy" and "endometriosis" and "efficacy" three bibliographic databases were searched for English written scientific articles published from 1 January 2008 to 3 March 2018. Only the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were evaluated in terms of whether they provided the appropriate level of scientific evidence, equivalent to level 1, degree 1b in the hierarchy of evidence. A list of criteria to ensure study replication and reproduction, considering CONSORT guideline and MECIR standards, was developed and used to evaluate RCTs' methodological soundness, and scores were granted. Three types of bias, namely selection bias (random sequence generation and allocation concealment), detection bias (blinding of outcome assessment), and attrition bias (incomplete outcome data) were also evaluated. Results: We found 387 articles on endometriosis therapy, of which 38 were RCTs: 30 double-blinded RCTs and 8 open-label RCTs. No article achieved the maximum score according to the evaluated methodological criteria. Even though 73.3% of the double-blinded RCTs had clear title, abstract, introduction, and objectives, only 13.3% provided precise information regarding experimental design and randomization, and also showed a low risk of bias. The blinding method was poorly reported in 43.3% of the double-blinded RCTs, while allocation concealment and random sequence generation were inadequate in 33.3% of them. Conclusions: None of the evaluated RCTs met all the methodological criteria, none had only a low risk of bias and provided sufficient details on methods and randomization to allow for the reproduction and replication of the study. Consequently, the appropriate level of scientific evidence (level 1, degree 1b) could not be granted. On endometriosis therapy, this study evaluated the quality of reporting in RCTs and not the quality of how the studies were performed.

Identifying Preoperative Factors Associated with Nonresponders in Women Undergoing Comprehensive Surgical Treatment for Endometriosis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To examine whether existing quality of health outcome measures can be used to predict or have an association with nonresponse surgery for endometriosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

Single endometriosis referral center.

PATIENTS

Women (n = 198) undergoing surgery for endometriosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Validated health questionnaires and visual analogue scales.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients were given validated health questionnaires, including Endometriosis Health Profile 30, Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index, EuroQol-5, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, preoperatively and at 12 months after full surgical excision of endometriosis. Visual analogue scales were also used that measured dyschezia, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic pain. Surgical management was dependent on severity of disease. Superficial disease was treated by laparoscopic peritoneal excision or laser ablation. Deep infiltrating disease involving the bowel was excised completely together with laparoscopic bowel surgery (shave, disc, or segmental resection) with/without concomitant total hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Nonresponders were defined as women who failed to demonstrate an improvement in pain scores 12 months postoperatively. We examined preoperative and postoperative questionnaires, visual analogue scores, and other variables such as age at onset of symptoms, type of surgery, and the presence of postoperative complications comparing responder and nonresponder women to identify the factors associated with nonresponse. Of 102 women treated for superficial endometriosis, 25 (24.51%) were nonresponders. No factors were associated with nonresponse at 12 months. Of 96 women treated for severe endometriosis involving the bowel, 10 (10.41%) were nonresponders. Nonresponders had significantly less preoperative pain (p = .031) and feeling of control (p = .015) than responders. There was no association between nonresponders and women who underwent a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy or those with complications. Radical bowel surgery (resection) was associated with nonresponders.

CONCLUSION

Minimal preoperative factors are associated with nonresponse for women having surgery for endometriosis. The severity of pain experienced by women with endometriosis may be used to predict their response to surgery.

The Role of Tumor Necrosis Factor α in the Biology of Uterine Fibroids and the Related Symptoms

Uterine fibroids (UFs) are the most common benign tumors of the female genital tract. The incidence of UFs has been estimated at 25⁻80% depending on selected population. The pathophysiology of UFs remains poorly understood. The transformation of smooth muscle cells of the uterus into abnormal, immortal cells, capable of clonal division, is the main component of all pathways leading to UF tumor formation and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) is believed to be one of the key factors in this field. TNF-α is a cell signaling protein involved in systemic inflammation and is one of the cytokines responsible for the acute phase reaction. This publication presents current data about the role of tumor necrosis factor α in the biology of UFs and the related symptoms. TNF-α is an extremely important cytokine associated with the biology of UFs, UF-related symptoms and complaints. Its concentration has been proven to be elevated in women with clinically symptomatic UFs. The presented data suggest the presence of an "inflammation-like" state in women with UFs where TNF-α is a potent inflammation inducer. The origin of numerous symptoms reported by women with UFs can be traced back to the TNF-α influence. Nevertheless, our knowledge on this subject remains limited and TNF-α dependent pathways in UF pathophysiology should be investigated further.

Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment

BACKGROUND

The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Vasodilators have been proposed to increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve uterine receptivity and enhance the chances for successful assisted pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers, and websites: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register of controlled trials, the Cochrane Central Register of of Controlled Trials, via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge, the Open System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (OpenSIGLE), the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS), clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of relevant articles. We conducted the search in October 2017 and applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators alone or in combination with other treatments versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence quality using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methods. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies with a total of 1326 women. All included studies compared a vasodilator versus placebo or no treatment. We judged most of these studies as having unclear risk of bias. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to moderate for most outcomes. The main limitations were imprecision due to low numbers of events and participants and risk of bias due to unclear methods of randomisation.Vasodilators probably make little or no difference in rates of live birth compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.69; three RCTs; N = 350; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) but probably increase overall rates of side effects including headache and tachycardia (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.66; four RCTs; N = 418; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 236 per 1000 women achieve live birth with placebo or no treatment, then between 196 and 398 per 1000 will do so with the use of vasodilators.Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators may slightly improve clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.77; 11 RCTs; N = 1054; I² = 6%; low-quality evidence). Vasodilators probably make little or no difference in rates of multiple gestation (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.42; three RCTs; N = 370; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), miscarriage (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.86; three RCTs; N = 350; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), or ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 8.69; two RCTs; N = 250; I² = 5%; low-quality evidence). All studies found benefit for endometrial thickening, but reported effects varied (I² = 92%) and ranged from a mean difference of 0.80 higher (95% CI 0.18 to 1.42) to 3.57 higher (95% CI 3.01 to 4.13) with very low-quality evidence, so we are uncertain how to interpret these results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to show whether vasodilators increase the live birth rate in women undergoing fertility treatment. However, low-quality evidence suggests that vasodilators may slightly increase clinical pregnancy rates. Moderate-quality evidence shows that vasodilators increase overall side effects in comparison with placebo or no treatment. Adequately powered studies are needed so that each treatment can be evaluated more accurately.

Chronic Niche Inflammation in Endometriosis-Associated Infertility: Current Understanding and Future Therapeutic Strategies

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent inflammatory disease that affects up to 10% of women of reproductive age and accounts for up to 50% of female infertility cases. It has been highly associated with poorer outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART), including decreased oocyte retrieval, lower implantation, and pregnancy rates. A better understanding of the pathogenesis of endometriosis-associated infertility is crucial for improving infertility treatment outcomes. Current theories regarding how endometriosis reduces fertility include anatomical distortion, ovulatory dysfunction, and niche inflammation-associated peritoneal or implantation defects. This review will survey the latest evidence on the role of inflammatory niche in the peritoneal cavity, ovaries, and uterus of endometriosis patients. Nonhormone treatment strategies that target these inflammation processes are also included. Furthermore, mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies are highlighted for potential endometriosis treatment because of their immunomodulatory effects and tropism toward inflamed lesion foci. Potential applications of stem cell therapy in treatment of endometriosis-associated infertility in particular for safety and efficacy are discussed.

Antioxidants for female subfertility

BACKGROUND

A couple may be considered to have fertility problems if they have been trying to conceive for over a year with no success. This may affect up to a quarter of all couples planning a child. It is estimated that for 40% to 50% of couples, subfertility may result from factors affecting women. Antioxidants are thought to reduce the oxidative stress brought on by these conditions. Currently, limited evidence suggests that antioxidants improve fertility, and trials have explored this area with varied results. This review assesses the evidence for the effectiveness of different antioxidants in female subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether supplementary oral antioxidants compared with placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant improve fertility outcomes for subfertile women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases (from their inception to September 2016) with no language or date restriction: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) specialised register, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies (CENTRAL CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED. We checked reference lists of appropriate studies and searched for ongoing trials in the clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment or treatment with another antioxidant, among women attending a reproductive clinic. We excluded trials comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and trials that only included fertile women attending a fertility clinic because of male partner infertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected eligible studies, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. The primary review outcome was live birth; secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates and adverse events. We pooled studies using a fixed-effect model, and calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the dichotomous outcomes of live birth, clinical pregnancy and adverse events. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence by applying GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 trials involving 6510 women. Investigators compared oral antioxidants, including combinations of antioxidants, N-acetyl-cysteine, melatonin, L-arginine, myo-inositol, D-chiro-inositol, carnitine, selenium, vitamin E, vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin D+calcium, CoQ10, pentoxifylline and omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids versus placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant.Very low-quality evidence suggests that antioxidants may be associated with an increased live birth rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.12, P > 0.001, 8 RCTs, 651 women, I2 = 47%). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live birth rate of 20%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 26% and 43%.Very low-quality evidence suggests that antioxidants may be associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.76, P < 0.001, 26 RCTs, 4271 women, I2 = 66%). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 22%, the rate among women using antioxidants would be between 27% and 33%. Heterogeneity was moderately high.There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in rates of miscarriage (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.08, P = 0.14, 18 RCTs, 2834 women, I2 = 23%, very low quality evidence). This suggests that, among subfertile women with an expected miscarriage rate of 7%, use of antioxidants would be expected to result in a miscarriage rate of between 4% and 7%. There was also insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in rates of multiple pregnancy (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.38, P = 0.98, 8 RCTs, 2163 women, I2 = 4%, very low quality evidence). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected multiple pregnancy rate of 8%, use of antioxidants would be expected to result in a multiple pregnancy rate between 6% and 11%. Likewise, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in rates of gastrointestinal disturbances (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 5.10, P = 0.47, 3 RCTs, 343 women, I2 = 0%, very low quality evidence). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected gastrointestinal disturbance rate of 2%, use of antioxidants would be expected to result in a rate between 1% and 11%. Overall adverse events were reported by 35 trials in the meta-analysis, but there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions.Only one trial reported on live birth, clinical pregnancy or adverse effects in the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison, and no conclusions could be drawn.Very low-quality evidence suggests that pentoxifylline may be associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.56, P = 0.009, 3 RCTs, 276 women, I2 = 0%). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 25%, the rate among women using pentoxifylline would be between 28% and 53%.There was insufficient evidence to determine whether there was a difference between the groups in rates of miscarriage (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.46 to 3.90, P = 0.58, 3 RCTs, 276 women, I2 = 0%) or multiple pregnancy (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.09, one RCT, 112 women, very low quality evidence). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected miscarriage rate of 4%, the rate among women using pentoxifylline would be between 2% and 15%. For multiple pregnancy, the data suggest that among subfertile women with an expected multiple pregnancy rate of 9%, the rate among women using pentoxifylline would be between 2% and 23%.The overall quality of evidence was limited by serious risk of bias associated with poor reporting of methods, imprecision and inconsistency.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review, there was very low-quality evidence to show that taking an antioxidant may provide benefit for subfertile women, but insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about adverse events. At this time, there is limited evidence in support of supplemental oral antioxidants for subfertile women.

New developments in the medical treatment of endometriosis

Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women of reproductive-age. The current treatments are surgical and hormonal but have limitations, including the risk of recurrence, side effects, contraceptive action for women who desire pregnancy, and cost. New treatments include gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues, selective progesterone (or estrogen) receptor modulators, aromatase inhibitors, immunomodulators, and antiangiogenic agents. Further research is needed into central sensitization, local neurogenesis, and the genetics of endometriosis to identify additional treatment targets. A wider range of medical options allows for the possibility of precision health and a more personalized treatment approach for women with endometriosis.

Variation in outcome reporting in endometriosis trials: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the outcomes and outcome measures reported in randomized controlled trials and their relationship with methodological quality, year of publication, commercial funding, and journal impact factor.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the following sources: (1) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, (2) Embase, and (3) MEDLINE from inception to November 2014.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

We included all randomized controlled trials evaluating a surgical intervention with or without a medical adjuvant therapy for the treatment of endometriosis symptoms.

STUDY DESIGN

Two authors independently selected trials, assessed methodological quality (Jadad score; range, 1-5), outcome reporting quality (Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in Cleft Palate criteria; range, 1-6), year of publication, impact factor in the year of publication, and commercial funding (yes or no). Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed using Spearman Rh and Mann-Whitney U tests. We used a multivariate linear regression model to assess relationship associations between outcome reporting quality and other variables.

RESULTS

There were 54 randomized controlled trials (5427 participants), which reported 164 outcomes and 113 outcome measures. The 3 most commonly reported primary outcomes were dysmenorrhea (10 outcome measures; 23 trials), dyspareunia (11 outcome measures; 21 trials), and pregnancy (3 outcome measures; 26 trials). The median quality of outcome reporting was 3 (interquartile range 4-2) and methodological quality 3 (interquartile range 5-2). Multivariate linear regression demonstrated a relationship between outcome reporting quality with methodological quality (β = 0.325; P = .038) and year of publication (β = 0.067; P = .040). No relationship was demonstrated between outcome reporting quality with journal impact factor (Rho = 0.190; P = .212) or commercial funding (P = .370).

CONCLUSION

Variation in outcome reporting within published endometriosis trials prohibits comparison, combination, and synthesis of data. This limits the usefulness of research to inform clinical practice, enhance patient care, and improve patient outcomes. In the absence of a core outcome set for endometriosis we recommend the use of the 3 most common pain (dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and pelvic pain) and subfertility (pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth) outcomes. International consensus among stakeholders is needed to establish a core outcome set for endometriosis trials.

Endometriosis: alternative methods of medical treatment

Endometriosis is an inflammatory estrogen-dependent disease defined by the presence of endometrial glands and stroma at extrauterine sites. The main purpose of endometriosis management is alleviating pain associated to the disease. This can be achieved surgically or medically, although in most women a combination of both treatments is required. Long-term medical treatment is usually needed in most women. Unfortunately, in most cases, pain symptoms recur between 6 months and 12 months once treatment is stopped. The authors conducted a literature search for English original articles, related to new medical treatments of endometriosis in humans, including articles published in PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library. Keywords included "endometriosis" matched with "medical treatment", "new treatment", "GnRH antagonists", "Aromatase inhibitors", "selective progesterone receptor modulators", "anti-TNF α", and "anti-angiogenic factors". Hormonal treatments currently available are effective in the relief of pain associated to endometriosis. Among new hormonal drugs, association to aromatase inhibitors could be effective in the treatment of women who do not respond to conventional therapies. GnRH antagonists are expected to be as effective as GnRH agonists, but with easier administration (oral). There is a need to find effective treatments that do not block the ovarian function. For this purpose, antiangiogenic factors could be important components of endometriosis therapy in the future. Upcoming researches and controlled clinical trials should focus on these drugs.

Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment

BACKGROUND

Since 1978, when Patrick Steptoe and Robert Edwards achieved the birth of the first test tube baby, assisted reproductive techniques have been refined and improved. However, the rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased. Therefore closer evaluation of the interventions is needed along with working towards improving uterus receptivity. Vasodilators have been proposed to increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve uterine receptivity and enhance the chances for successful assisted pregnancies.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers and websites: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register of controlled trials, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), The Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, the Open System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (OpenSIGLE), the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS) and ClinicalTrials.gov. The search was conducted in February 2014. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of vasodilators alone or in combination with other treatments compared with placebo or with other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using the numbers of events in the control and intervention groups of each study. Study data were combined using a random-effects model, and evidence quality was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies with a total of 797 women were included in this review. Most of the studies were judged as having an unclear risk of bias. Three studies reported live births, two reported vasodilator-related side effects, 10 reported clinical pregnancies (diagnosed by differing criteria) and four reported other side effects (multiple gestation, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy).Overall, no evidence suggested that treatment with vasodilators increased live birth rates compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.69, P value 0.37, three RCTs, 350 women, I(2) = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). This indicates that among women undergoing fertility treatment who have a 24% chance of live birth without the use of vasodilators, between 19% and 40% will achieve live birth with the use of vasodilators.No evidence was found of a difference between vasodilators and placebo or no treatment in the incidence of treatment side effects (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 7.93, P value 0.55, two RCTs, 258 women, I(2) = 32%, low-quality evidence). Nor did any evidence show a difference between them in terms of multiple gestation, spontaneous abortion/miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy rates. However few relevant data were available.Overall, treatment with vasodilators was associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.92, P value 0.05, eight RCTs, 717 women, I(2) = 0%, low-quality evidence). However, confidence intervals do not rule out no effect of the intervention, and when studies of vasodilators combined with another medication (vitamin E or oestrogen) were excluded, the effects of treatment with vasodilators alone on clinical pregnancy rates were more uncertain.The evidence was of low or moderate quality, and the main limitations were imprecision and lack of clarity about study methods. Risk of publication bias could not be assessed because of the low number of identified studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to show that vasodilators increased the live birth rate in women undergoing fertility treatment. However, low-quality evidence suggests that vasodilators may increase clinical pregnancy rates in comparison with placebo or no treatment. Evidence was insufficient to show whether any particular vasodilator, administered alone or in combination with other active medications, was superior, and evidence was insufficient to allow the review authors to reach any conclusions regarding adverse effects. Adequately powered studies are needed so that each treatment can be evaluated more accurately.

Systematic review of endometriosis pain assessment: how to choose a scale?

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies concerning endometriosis and pain have been reported. However, there is no consensus on the best method to evaluate pain in endometriosis and many scales have been used. Moreover, there are only a few descriptions of minimal clinically important differences after treatment (MCID) to evaluate variations in pain. In our study, we aim to identify pain scales used in endometriosis pain treatment, to address their strong and weak points and to define which would be the ideal scale to help clinicians and researchers to evaluate endometriosis-related pain.

METHODS

A search of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was carried out for publications in English, French or Portuguese from 1980 to December 2012, for the words: endometriosis, treatment, pain. Studies were selected if they studied an endometriosis treatment and a pain scale was specified. A quantitative and a qualitative analysis of each scale was performed to define strong and weak points of each scale (systematic registration number: CRD42013005336).

RESULTS

A total of 736 publications were identified. After excluding duplications and applying inclusion criteria 258 studies remained. We found that the visual analog scale (VAS) is the most frequently used scale. Both VAS and the numerical rating scale (NRS) show a good balance between strong and weak points in comparison with others such as the Biberoglu and Behrman scale. Concerning MCID, only VAS, NRS and Brief Pain Inventory scales have reported MCID and, among these, only VAS MCID has been studied in endometriosis patients (VAS MCID = 10 mm). Adding the Clinical Global Impression score (CGI) to the pain scale allows calculation of the MCID.

CONCLUSIONS

When using pain scales their strengths and weaknesses must be known and included in the analysis. VAS is the most frequently used pain scale and, together with NRS, seems the best adapted for endometriosis pain measurement. The use of VAS or NRS for each type of typical pain related to endometriosis (dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia and non-menstrual chronic pelvic pain), combined with the CGI and a quality-of-life scale will provide both clinicians and researchers with tools to evaluate treatment response.

Medical treatments for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain

The main sequelae of endometriosis are represented by infertility and chronic pelvic pain. Chronic pelvic pain causes disability and distress with a very high economic impact. In the last decades, an impressive amount of pharmacological agents have been tested for the treatment of endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. However, only a few of these have been introduced into clinical practice. Following the results of the controlled studies available, to date, the first-line treatment for endometriosis associated pain is still represented by oral contraceptives used continuously. Progestins represent an acceptable alternative. In women with rectovaginal lesions or colorectal endometriosis, norethisterone acetate at low dosage should be preferred. GnRH analogues may be used as second-line treatment, but significant side effects should be taken into account. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used, but there is inconclusive evidence for their efficacy in relieving endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. Other agents such as GnRH antagonist, aromatase inhibitors, immunomodulators, selective progesterone receptor modulators, and histone deacetylase inhibitors seem to be very promising, but there is not enough evidence to support their introduction into routine clinical practice. Some other agents, such as peroxisome proliferator activated receptors-γ ligands, antiangiogenic agents, and melatonin have been proven to be efficacious in animal studies, but they have not yet been tested in clinical studies.

Endometriosis: pathogenesis and treatment

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial-type mucosa outside the uterine cavity. Of the proposed pathogenic theories (retrograde menstruation, coelomic metaplasia and Müllerian remnants), none explain all the different types of endometriosis. According to the most convincing model, the retrograde menstruation hypothesis, endometrial fragments reaching the pelvis via transtubal retrograde flow, implant onto the peritoneum and abdominal organs, proliferate and cause chronic inflammation with formation of adhesions. The number and amount of menstrual flows together with genetic and environmental factors determines the degree of phenotypic expression of the disease. Endometriosis is estrogen-dependent, manifests during reproductive years and is associated with pain and infertility. Dysmenorrhoea, deep dyspareunia, dyschezia and dysuria are the most frequently reported symptoms. Standard diagnosis is carried out by direct visualization and histologic examination of lesions. Pain can be treated by excising peritoneal implants, deep nodules and ovarian cysts, or inducing lesion suppression by abolishing ovulation and menstruation through hormonal manipulation with progestins, oral contraceptives and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists. Medical therapy is symptomatic, not cytoreductive; surgery is associated with high recurrence rates. Although lesion eradication is considered a fertility-enhancing procedure, the benefit on reproductive performance is moderate. Assisted reproductive technologies constitute a valid alternative. Endometriosis is associated with a 50% increase in the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer, but preventive interventions are feasible.

Antioxidants for female subfertility

BACKGROUND

A couple may be considered to have fertility problems if they have been trying to conceive for over a year with no success. This difficulty with conception may affect up to a quarter of all couples planning a child. The reported prevalence of subfertility has increased significantly over the past twenty years. It is estimated that for 40% to 50% of couples, subfertility may be a result of female problems, including ovulatory disorders, poor egg quality, fallopian tube damage and endometriosis. Antioxidants are thought to reduce the oxidative stress brought on by these conditions. Currently, limited evidence suggests that antioxidants improve fertility, and trials have explored this area with varied results. This review assessed the evidence for the effectiveness of different antioxidants in female subfertility.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether supplementary oral antioxidants compared with placebo, no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant improve fertility outcomes for subfertile women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases (from inception to April 2013) with no language restrictions applied: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS and OpenSIGLE. We also searched conference abstracts and citation lists in the ISI Web of Knowledge. Ongoing trials were searched in the Trials Registers. Reference lists were checked, and a search on Google was performed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any type, dose or combination of oral antioxidant supplement with placebo, no treatment or treatment with another antioxidant, among women attending a reproductive clinic. Trials comparing antioxidants with fertility drugs alone and trials that exclusively included fertile women attending a fertility clinic because of male partner infertility were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently screened 2127 titles and abstracts, and 67 of these potentially eligible trials were appraised for inclusion and quality through review of full texts and contact with authors. Three review authors were involved in data extraction and assessment of risk of bias. Review authors also collected data on adverse events as reported from the trials. Studies were pooled using fixed-effect models; however, if high heterogeneity was found, a random-effects model was used. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the dichotomous outcomes of live birth, clinical pregnancy and adverse events. Analyses were stratified by type of antioxidant, by indications for subfertility and by those women also undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection techniques (ICSIs). The overall quality of the evidence was assessed by applying GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 28 trials involving 3548 women were included in this review. Investigators compared oral antioxidants, including combinations of antioxidants, pentoxifylline, N-acetyl-cysteine, melatonin, L-arginine, vitamin E, myo-inositol, vitamin C, vitamin D+calcium and omega-3-polyunsaturated fatty acids with placebo, with no treatment/standard treatment or another antioxidant.Antioxidants were not associated with an increased live birth rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.26, P = 0.82, 2 RCTs, 97 women, I(2) = 75%, very low-quality evidence). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected live birth rate of 37%, the rate among women taking antioxidants would be between 10% and 83%.Antioxidants were not associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment/standard treatment (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.85, P = 0.14, 13 RCTs, 2441 women, I(2)= 55%, very low-quality evidence). This suggests that among subfertile women with an expected clinical pregnancy rate of 23%, the rate among women taking antioxidants would be between 22% and 36%.Only one trial reported on live birth in the antioxidant versus antioxidant comparison, and two trials reported on clinical pregnancy in this comparison. Only subtotals were used in this analysis, and meta-analysis was not possible as each trial used a different antioxidant.Pentoxifylline was associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.44, P = 0.009, 3 RCTs, 276 women, I(2) = 0%).Adverse events were reported by 14 trials in the meta-analysis and included miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy and gastrointestinal effects. No evidence revealed a difference in adverse effects between antioxidant groups and control groups, but these data were limited.The overall quality of evidence was 'very low' to 'low' because of poor reporting of outcomes, the number of small studies included, high risk of bias within studies and heterogeneity in the primary analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the evidence in the 'antioxidant versus placebo/no treatment' and in the 'antioxidant versus antioxidant' comparisons was assessed to be 'very low'. Antioxidants were not associated with an increased live birth rate or clinical pregnancy rate. There was some evidence of an association of pentoxifylline with an increased clinical pregnancy rate; however, there were only three trials included in this comparison. Future trials may change this result. Variation in the types of antioxidants given meant that we could not assess whether one antioxidant was better than another. There did not appear to be any association of antioxidants with adverse effects for women, but data for these outcomes were limited.

Pharmacotherapy for the prevention of chronic pain after surgery in adults

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain can often occur after surgery, substantially impairing patients' health and quality of life. It is caused by complex mechanisms that are not yet well understood. The predictable nature of most surgical procedures has allowed for the conduct of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological interventions aimed at preventing chronic postsurgical pain.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of systemic drugs for the prevention of chronic pain after surgery by examining the proportion of patients reporting pain three months or more after surgery. The secondary objective was to evaluate the safety of drugs administered for the prevention of chronic pain after surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of various systemically administered drugs for the prevention of chronic pain after surgery from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and handsearches of other reviews and trial registries. The most recent search was performed on 17 July 2013.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trials involving adults and evaluating one or more drugs administered systemically before, during or after surgery, or both, which measured pain three months or more after surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data collected from each study included the study drug name, dose, route, timing and duration of dosing; surgical procedure; proportion of patients reporting any pain three months or more after surgery, reporting at least 4/10 or moderate to severe pain three months or more after surgery; and proportion of participants dropping out of the study due to treatment-emergent adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 40 RCTs of various pharmacological interventions including intravenous ketamine (14 RCTs), oral gabapentin (10 RCTs), oral pregabalin (5 RCTs), non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (3 RCTs), intravenous steroids (3 RCTs), oral N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) blockers (3 RCTs), oral mexiletine (2 RCTs), intravenous fentanyl (1 RCT), intravenous lidocaine (1 RCT), oral venlafaxine (1 RCT) and inhaled nitrous oxide (1 RCT). Meta-analysis suggested a modest but statistically significant reduction in the incidence of chronic pain after surgery following treatment with ketamine but not gabapentin or pregabalin. Results with ketamine should be viewed with caution since most of the included trials were small (that is < 100 participants per treatment arm), which could lead to the overestimation of treatment effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Additional evidence from better, well designed, large-scale trials is needed in order to more rigorously evaluate pharmacological interventions for the prevention of chronic pain after surgery. Furthermore, available evidence does not support the efficacy of gabapentin, pregabalin, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, intravenous steroids, oral NMDA blockers, oral mexiletine, intravenous fentanyl, intravenous lidocaine, oral venlafaxine or inhaled nitrous oxide for the prevention of chronic postoperative pain.

An update on the pharmacological management of endometriosis

INTRODUCTION

Endometriosis is a common disease that causes pain symptoms and/or infertility in women in their reproductive years. The disease is characterised by the presence of endometrium-like tissue - glands and stroma - outside the uterine cavity. Different treatment options exist for endometriosis including medical and surgical treatments or a combination of the two approaches. The most commonly used medications are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, GnRH agonists, androgen derivatives such as danazol, combined oral contraceptive pills, progestogens and more recently the levonorgestrel intrauterine system.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review current medical treatments used for symptomatic endometriosis and also discuss new treatment approaches. The authors conducted a literature search for randomised controlled trials related to medical treatments of endometriosis in humans, searched the Cochrane library for reviews and also searched for registered trials that have not yet been published on ClinicalTrials.gov.

EXPERT OPINION

The medical treatment of endometriosis is effective at treating pain and preventing recurrence of disease after surgery. Remarkably, the oral contraceptive pill taken continuously is as effective as GnRH-a, while causing far less side-effects. Conversely, no treatment currently exists for enhancing fecundity in women whose infertility is associated with endometriosis. As all existing therapies of endometriosis are contraceptive, great efforts should be targeted at researching novel products that reduce the disease expression without shuttering ovulation.

A new oral contraceptive regimen for endometriosis management: preliminary experience with 24/4-day drospirenone/ethinylestradiol 3 mg/20 mcg

We report our preliminary experience with the use of a low-dose oral contraceptive containing Drospirenone/Ethinylestradiol 3 mg/20 mcg, both in cyclic and continuous regimen for endometriosis management. A total of 93 women were retrospectively included: 52 were treated by medical therapy (exclusive combined oral contraceptives (COC)-users), while 41 were submitted to surgery followed by postoperative therapy (postoperative COC-users). A clinical examination was performed at baseline and at 6-months follow-up. Presence and intensity of endometriosis-related symptoms were assessed by a visual analogue scale. Presence and dimension of endometriotic lesions were evaluated by transvaginal ultrasonography. Adverse effects and tolerability were analysed. In exclusive COC-users, significant reductions in dysmenorrhoea and dyspareunia scores and in endometrioma mean diameter were observed at follow-up. In postoperative COC-users, anatomical and symptom recurrence rates at follow-up were 4.9% and 17%, respectively. The most frequent adverse effects were spotting and headache. No difference between cyclic and continuous regimen in terms of symptom relief, lesion progression and tolerability was observed. From our preliminary experience, Drospirenone/Ethinylestradiol 3 mg/20 mcg seems to be promising in endometriosis management.

New treatment strategies and emerging drugs in endometriosis

Introduction: Endometriosis, histologically defined as the presence of endometrium-like tissue - glands and stroma - that develops outside of the uterine cavity, is still an enigmatic disease responsible for pelvic pain and infertility. The current treatments of endometriosis are surgery and hormonal therapies that act by suppressing ovulation and/or directly on steroid receptors located in endometriotic lesions. Areas covered: New hormonal and non-hormonal therapies are being developed for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain. The authors review the state of advancement and the results of novel treatments studied in registered trials ( www.ClinicalTrials.gov ). Cellular signaling pathways activated in endometriotic cells, which constitute potential targets for future treatments, are also described. Expert opinion: Therapeutic research efforts should focus on identifying and testing substances capable of acting locally on the lesions themselves, without interfering with ovulation, in order to be efficacious on both pain symptoms and infertility.

Pentoxifylline for endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a chronic, recurring condition that occurs during the reproductive years. It is characterized by endometrial tissue developing outside the uterine cavity. This endometrial tissue development is dependent on oestrogen produced primarily by the ovaries and, therefore, traditional management has focused on ovarian suppression. In this review we considered the role of modulation of the immune system as an alternative approach. This is an update of a Cochrane Review previously published in 2009 (Lu 2009).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pentoxifylline, which has anti-inflammatory effects, in subfertile, premenopausal women for the management of endometriosis.

SEARCH METHODS

For the first publication of this review we searched the following databases (from inception to December 2008) for trials: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. In addition, all reference lists of included trials were searched and experts in the field were contacted in an attempt to locate trials. This search was rerun to 23 November 2011, for this update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pentoxifylline with placebo or no treatment, medical treatment, or surgery in subfertile, premenopausal women were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial risk of bias, and extracted data using data extraction forms. We contacted study authors for additional information and data. The domains assessed for risk of bias were sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting. Peto odds ratios (OR) were used for reporting dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whilst mean differences (MD) were expressed for continuous data. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials involving 334 participants were included. One RCT [n=34] showed pentoxifylline had no significant effect on reduction in pain (MD -1.60, 95% CI -3.32 to 0.12). There was no evidence of an increase in clinical pregnancy events in the pentoxifylline group compared with placebo (three RCTs [n=67] OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.89 to 266). One RCT studied recurrence of endometriosis [n=88] (OR 0.88,95% CI 0.27 to 2.84). No trials reported the effects of pentoxifylline on the odds of live birth rate per woman, improvement of endometriosis-related symptoms, or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has been updated in 2011. The results of the original review published in 2009 remain unchanged. There is still not enough evidence to support the use of pentoxifylline in the management of premenopausal women with endometriosis in terms of subfertility and relief of pain outcomes.

Combined oral contraceptive therapy in women with posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) in women with deep infiltrating endometriosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Tertiary care university hospital.

PATIENTS

One hundred six women with uncomplicated posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis scheduled to undergo laparoscopic surgery between November 2004 and November 2009.

INTERVENTIONS

During the waiting-list time, between surgical scheduling and laparoscopic intervention (preoperative period), 75 patients received cyclic COCs (users), and 31 received no hormone therapy (COC nonusers).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients had undergone 2 clinical examinations, at surgical scheduling and immediately before surgery. Presence and intensity of dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and dyschezia were evaluated using a 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) (primary outcome). In both examinations, patients underwent transvaginal ultrasonography to evaluate localization and mean diameter of endometriotic nodules. Quality of life was evaluated using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) score. Mean (SD) nodule diameter at the beginning and end of the preoperative period in COC users was, respectively, 24.81 (15.13) mm and 26.66 (15.5) mm (p = .09), and in the nonuser group was, respectively, 23.09 (11.11) mm and 30.89 (19.1) mm (p = .007). In COC users, VAS scores for dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and dyschezia did not vary significantly during the preoperative period (p = .90, p = .55, p = .15, and p = .17, respectively). In nonusers, VAS scores for dysmenorrhea and dyspareunia were significantly higher at the second examination than at the first examination (p = .002 and p = .005, respectively), whereas scores for chronic pelvic pain and dyschezia did not vary during the preoperative period (p = .88 and p = .16, respectively). The Short Form-36 total score did not vary significantly during the preoperative period in either the COC user group (p = .82) or the nonusers group (p = .76).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined oral contraceptive therapy can have a role in restraining the progression of dysmenorrhea and dyspareunia and the growth of deep endometriotic nodules.

Endometriosis and mechanisms of pelvic pain

Endometriosis remains an enigmatic disorder in that the cause, the natural history, and the precise mechanisms by which it causes pain are not completely understood. The pain symptoms most commonly attributed to endometriosis are dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, and chronic pelvic pain. Pain may be due to nociceptive, inflammatory, or neuropathic mechanisms, and there is evidence that all 3 of these mechanisms are relevant to endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. It is proposed that the clinically observed inconsistencies of the relationships of endometriosis severity and the presence or severity of pain are likely due to variable roles of different pain mechanisms in endometriosis. A better understanding of the roles of nociceptive, inflammatory, and neuropathic pain in endometriosis is likely to improve the treatment of women with endometriosis-associated pelvic pain.

Pentoxifylline versus medical therapies for subfertile women with endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is a chronic, recurring condition that occurs during the reproductive years. It is characterized by endometrial tissue developing outside the uterine cavity. This endometrial tissue development is dependent on estrogen produced primarily by the ovaries and, therefore, traditional management has focused on ovarian suppression. In this review we considered the role of modulation of the immune system as an alternative approach.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of pentoxifylline, which has anti-inflammatory effects, in the management of endometriosis in subfertile, premenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases (from inception to December 2008) for trials: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. In addition, all reference lists of included trials were searched and experts in the field were contacted in an attempt to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pentoxifylline with placebo or no treatment, medical treatment, or surgery in subfertile, premenopausal women were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data using data extraction forms. We contacted study authors for additional information and data. The domains assessed for risk of bias were sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting. Odds ratios (OR) were used for reporting dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whilst mean differences (MD) were expressed for continuous data. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials involving 334 participants were included. Results showed pentoxifylline had no significant effect on reduction in pain (one RCT, MD -1.60, 95% CI -3.32 to 0.12). There was no evidence of an increase in clinical pregnancy events in the pentoxifylline group compared with placebo (three RCTs, OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.89 to 266). For recurrence of endometriosis, one RCT reported an OR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.27 to 2.84). No trials reported the effects of pentoxifylline on the odds of live birth rate per woman, improvement of endometriosis-related symptoms, or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not enough evidence to support the use of pentoxifylline in the management of premenopausal women with endometriosis in terms of subfertility and relief of pain outcomes.

Effect of pentoxifylline on vascular endothelial growth factor C and flk-1 expression on endometrial implants in the rat endometriosis model

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of pentoxifylline, on vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-C and flk-1 expression in the rat endometriosis model.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

SETTING

Academic institution.

ANIMAL(S)

Twenty Wistar rats with surgically induced endometriosis.

INTERVENTION(S)

Animals were evaluated after surgical induction of endometriosis and random allocation to a group that received pentoxifylline and a control group that received NaCl 0.9%, for 3 weeks. At the end of the treatment period the animals were killed and the implants evaluated macroscopically as well as by immunohistochemistry.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Morphologic changes of the endometriotic implants; and evaluation of VEGF-C and flk-1 expression by a semiquantitative analysis (HSCORE) for the intensity of immunohistochemical reactivity.

RESULT(S)

A significant reduction was observed in the mean volume of the endometriotic implants per animal in the treatment group as compared with the control group. There was a significant reduction not only in the mean volume of implants per animal but also in the mean number of implants per animal after treatment. By immunohistochemical evaluation (HSCORE), there was a significant reduction in VEGF-C expression after treatment in all areas examined. A significant reduction of flk-1 expression was also noted in the glandular compartment after treatment but not in the epithelial surface or stroma.

CONCLUSION(S)

Pentoxifylline may cause suppression of endometriotic lesions by suppressing angiogenesis through VEGF-C and flk-1 expression.

New drugs in development for the treatment of endometriosis

Endometriosis is a common and enigmatic disease causing pelvic pain and infertility. Current treatment is mainly based on the use of surgery and ovarian suppressive agents. There is in particular the need for new therapeutic options able to allow a normal menstrual cycle to occur and also consent pregnancy. In the present review, we aimed to give a concise and practical overview in order to allow the clinician to clearly understand the level of development of these drugs. We have presented only treatments supported by in vivo researches with a special attention to studies in humans. Results show appealing new possibilities are emerging from agents counteracting the endometriosis-associated inflammation. Recent data also suggests that there is still the opportunity to refine the use of already available agents.