Reproducibility of the Endometriosis Fertility Index: a prospective inter-/intra-rater agreement study

ENDOGRADE: A four level classification to rate surgical complexity in endometriosis

OBJECTIVES

We studied a post operative classification of surgical complexity in endometriosis.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective monocentric observational study was conducted between January 2001 to December 2019 and included 764 women with DE that underwent surgery. We retrospectively graded surgical complexity through operative reports according to the ENDOGRADE classification, that grades the surgical complexity of DE in four progressive levels.

RESULTS

Operating time was longer for patients rated ENDOGRADE 3 (228±93 min) compared to patients rated ENDOGRADE 2 (120± 51 min) (p<10-3) and for patients rated ENDOGRADE 4 (301±99 min) compared to patients rated ENDOGRADE 3 (228±93 min), (p<10-3). Eighty percent (20/25) of peroperative complications were rated ENDOGRADE 3 or 4, 20% (5/25) were rated ENDOGRADE 1 or 2 (p = 0.01). Patients rated ENDOGRADE 2, 3 and 4 were 10.3 times (95CI=2.4-44.9, p = 2.10-3), 12.2 times (95CI=2.9-50.2, p = 5.10-4) and 38.3 times (95CI=9.1-162, p = 7.10-7) more likely to experience postoperative complications than those rated ENDOGRADE 1. According to multivariate analysis, only patients rated ENDOGRADE 2, 3, and 4 had a significantly higher risk of postoperative complications with an OR=16.0 (95CI=2.0-127.4, p = 9.10-3), OR=16.2 (95CI=1.6-159.7, p = 0.02) and OR=104.2 (95CI=24.6-440.5, p = 4.10-3), respectively.

CONCLUSION

ENDOGRADE classification of surgical complexity in DE is correlated to operating time, per- and post-operative complications.

A Lifelong Impact on Endometriosis: Pathophysiology and Pharmacological Treatment

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with bothersome symptoms in premenopausal women and is complicated with long-term systemic impacts in the post-menopausal stage. It is generally defined by the presence of endometrial-like tissue outside the uterine cavity, which causes menstrual disorders, chronic pelvic pain, and infertility. Endometriotic lesions can also spread and grow in extra-pelvic sites; the chronic inflammatory status can cause systemic effects, including metabolic disorder, immune dysregulation, and cardiovascular diseases. The uncertain etiologies of endometriosis and their diverse presentations limit the treatment efficacy. High recurrence risk and intolerable side effects result in poor compliance. Current studies for endometriosis have paid attention to the advances in hormonal, neurological, and immunological approaches to the pathophysiology and their potential pharmacological intervention. Here we provide an overview of the lifelong impacts of endometriosis and summarize the updated consensus on therapeutic strategies.

Endometriosis-associated infertility: From pathophysiology to tailored treatment

Despite the clinically recognized association between endometriosis and infertility, the mechanisms implicated in endometriosis-associated infertility are not fully understood. Endometriosis is a multifactorial and systemic disease that has pleiotropic direct and indirect effects on reproduction. A complex interaction between endometriosis subtype, pain, inflammation, altered pelvic anatomy, adhesions, disrupted ovarian reserve/function, and compromised endometrial receptivity as well as systemic effects of the disease define endometriosis-associated infertility. The population of infertile women with endometriosis is heterogeneous, and diverse patients' phenotypes can be observed in the clinical setting, thus making difficult to establish a precise diagnosis and a single mechanism of endometriosis related infertility. Moreover, clinical management of infertility associated with endometriosis can be challenging due to this heterogeneity. Innovative non-invasive diagnostic tools are on the horizon that may allow us to target the specific dysfunctional alteration in the reproduction process. Currently the treatment should be individualized according to the clinical situation and to the suspected level of impairment. Here we review the etiology of endometriosis related infertility as well as current treatment options, including the roles of surgery and assisted reproductive technologies.

The treatment of endometriosis-associated infertility

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the recent evidence around the treatment of infertility in patients with endometriosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

The management of endometriosis associated infertility remains challenging. There have been an increasing number of prospective observational studies highlighting the role of surgery to enhance assisted conception amongst those with deep rectovaginal endometriosis. Further validation studies confirm the role of the endometriosis fertility index in prediction of reproductive outcomes after surgery, and confirm that it can be employed in counselling patients prior to surgery on their likelihood of spontaneous conception. Further randomized trials are required to establish the role of surgically treating superficial and deep endometriosis and both spontaneous and assisted conception outcomes.

SUMMARY

Endometriosis continues to present challenges in counselling patients with regards to their fertility prospects. This article reviews the recent research findings that may assist in the management of patients with endometriosis associated infertility.

Reproductive and postsurgical outcomes of infertile women with deep infiltrating endometriosis

Background

This study aimed to summarize and analyze clinical characteristics and reproductive outcomes in postoperative deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 55 reproductive-aged patients who were diagnosed with DIE, wished to conceive and underwent resection surgery at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, from January 2009–June 2017. Those with any plausible infertility factor or abnormalities in the partner’s semen analysis were excluded. Patient characteristics, preoperative symptoms, infertility history, intraoperative findings and reproductive outcomes were followed up and recorded. Risk factors for reproductive outcomes were identified for women who became pregnant versus those who did not by univariate logistic regression. Additionally, pre- and postoperative endometriosis health profile questionnaire-30 (EHP-30), Knowles–Eccersley–Scott Symptom questionnaire (KESS), Cox Menstrual Symptom Scale (CMSS) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) scores were used to evaluate the effect of DIE surgery on quality of life.

Results

The average age was 30.22 ± 3.62 years, with no difference between the pregnancy and nonpregnancy groups. The average follow-up time was 26.57 ± 14.51 months. There were 34 pregnancies (61.82%): 24 (70.59%) conceived spontaneously and 10 (29.41%) by in vitro fertilization (IVF). Twenty-eight patients (82.35%) had term deliveries. The interval between operation and pregnancy was 10.33 ± 5.6 (1–26) months. Univariate analysis showed that a lower endometriosis fertility index (EFI) score (EFI < 8) was a risk factor for infertility (OR: 3.17 (1.15–10.14), p = .044). For patients with incomplete surgery, postoperative gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) administration improved the pregnancy rate (p < 0.05). Regarding quality of life, there was significant improvement (p < 0.05) in the postoperative EHP-30, KESS and CMSS scores compared with preoperative scores in both groups. Although there was no obvious difference in FSFI scores, significant improvement in dyspareunia was observed (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Overall, the postoperative pregnancy rate of DIE patients was 61.82%. Surgical management of DIE for patients with complaints of pain and with pregnancy intentions was feasible and effective. Long-term expectant treatment should not be advised for patients with lower EFI scores (EFI < 8), and postoperative IVF–ET may be a good choice. More cases should be enrolled for further study, and randomized studies are required.

Endometriosis Classification, Staging and Reporting Systems: A Review on the Road to a Universally Accepted Endometriosis Classification

OBJECTIVE

In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice?

DATA SOURCES

A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose.

CONCLUSION

Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated for the purpose for which they were developed. The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered. It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working towards a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

Endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems: a review on the road to a universally accepted endometriosis classification. Hum Reprod Open 2021;2021:hoab025. [PMID: 34693032 PMCID: PMC8530712 DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoab025]

STUDY QUESTION

Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated, in 46 studies, for the purpose for which they were developed.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose.

LARGE SCALE DATA

NA.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working toward a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The meetings and activities of the working group were funded by the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy, European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and World Endometriosis Society. A.W.H. reports grant funding from the MRC, NIHR, CSO, Wellbeing of Women, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Standard Life, Consultancy fees from Roche Diagnostics, AbbVie, Nordic Pharma and Ferring, outside the submitted work. In addition, A.W.H. has a patent Serum biomarker for endometriosis pending. N.P.J. reports personal fees from Abbott, Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Vifor Pharma, Roche Diagnostics, outside the submitted work; he is also President of the World Endometriosis Society and chair of the trust board. S.M. reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, and personal fees from Roche outside the submitted work. C.T. reports grants, non-financial support and other from Merck SA, non-financial support and other from Gedeon Richter, non-financial support from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work and without private revenue. K.T.Z. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare, MDNA Life Sciences, Roche Diagnostics Inc, Volition Rx, outside the submitted work; she is also a Board member (Secretary) of the World Endometriosis Society and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, Research Advisory Board member of Wellbeing of Women, UK (research charity), and Chair, Research Directions Working Group, World Endometriosis Society. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NA.

Endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems: a review on the road to a universally accepted endometriosis classification

Background

In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. However, endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems that have been published and validated for use in clinical practice have not been systematically reviewed up to now.

Objectives

The aim of the current review is to provide a historical overview of these different systems based on an assessment of published studies.

Materials and Methods

A systematic Pubmed literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarised.

Results

Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific and different purposes. There is still no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating different systems are summarised showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the Enzian system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose.

Conclusions

Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated, in 46 studies, for the purpose for which they were developed. It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes.

What is new?

This overview of existing systems is a first step in working towards a universally accepted endometriosis classification.

Estimation of the Endometriosis Fertility Index prior to operative laparoscopy

STUDY QUESTION

Can the Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI) be estimated accurately before surgery?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The EFI can be estimated accurately based on mere clinical/ultrasound information, with some improvement after adding data from diagnostic laparoscopy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The EFI is a validated clinical instrument predicting the probability of pregnancy after endometriosis surgery without the use of ART. Being an end-of-surgery-score, it implies the decision for operative laparoscopy to be made in advance-hence, its role in the pre-surgical decision-making process remains to be established.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Single-cohort prospective observational study in 82 patients undergoing complete endometriosis excision (between June and December 2016). Two methods were used to estimate the final EFI: type A based on non-surgical clinical/ultrasound findings only, and type B based on the combination of non-surgical clinical/ultrasound findings and diagnostic laparoscopy data. To calculate EFI type A, an algorithm was created to translate non-surgical clinical/imaging information into rASRM (revised American Society of Reproductive Medicine)-and EFI points. EFI type A and type B estimates were assessed for their clinical and numerical agreement with the final EFI score. Agreement was defined as clinical if EFI scores were within the same range (0-4, 5-6, 7-10), and numerical if their difference was ≤1.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

All 82 patients underwent complete laparoscopic CO2-laser excision of any rASRM stage of endometriosis in the Leuven University Fertility Centre (LUFC) of University Hospitals Leuven, a tertiary referral centre for both endometriosis and infertility. An anonymized clinical research file was created. For each patient, three different data sets were created, in order to allow the estimation of the (surgical part) EFI and of the rASRM scores, defined as follows: 'Estimated type A' contained only non-surgical clinical/imaging data, 'Estimated type B' included type A information plus the information of the diagnostic laparoscopy and 'Final EFI' included information of type A, type B and all intra-operative information required to calculate the final EFI. To calculate EFI type A without surgical information, a set of rules was used to translate pre-surgical clinical/imaging information into (rASRM and EFI points). Scoring was done by one person (C.T.), with a time interval of 4 weeks between sessions for each EFI type. Next to the EFI, also rASRM score and stage were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Agreement rate between estimated EFI type A and final EFI was high for both the clinical (0.915; 95% CI 0.832-0.965) and numerical definition (0.878; 95% CI 0.787-0.940). Agreement rates between estimated EFI type B and final EFI were even higher (clinical (0.988; 95% CI 0.934-1.000), numerical (0.963; 95% CI 0.897-0.992)).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Type A estimation is dependent on high-level gynaecological ultrasound expertise, which may not be available in all clinics. A small number of patients had no prior clinical, ultrasound (hard markers) or surgical confirmation of the diagnosis of endometriosis. When applying the estimated EFI type A in clinical practice, a priori assumptions of the presence or absence of endometriosis will need to be made in adjunct to the estimation of the estimated type A EFI when counselling patients on the potential benefit of an (at least diagnostic) laparoscopy. The level of agreement for type A or B should also be taken into account when counselling patients on the type of efforts undertaken to attempt to diagnose or rule out endometriosis.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

As this study reports, the EFI can be estimated accurately based on clinical/ultrasound data only without the need for any surgical data. This means that the EFI could be used as an instrument to guide joint physician-patient decision-making between surgery, ART or other fertility management options for the individualized treatment of women with endometriosis-related infertility.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

During this study period, C.T. was supported by FWO (Research Fund Flanders, Grant number 1700816N) and UZ Leuven KOF (University Hospitals Leuven, Klinisch Onderzoeksfonds).The LUFC received unrestricted research grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck SA. Gedeon Richter and MSD sponsored travel to and attendance at scientific meetings. C.M. received consultancy fees from Lumenis (paid to KU Leuven, no private revenue). T.D. has been vice-president and head of global medical affairs infertility for the multinational pharmaceutical company Merck (Darmstadt, Germany) since 1 October 2015. He continues his academic appointment on a part-time basis as Professor of Reproductive Medicine at the University of Leuven (KU Leuven). T.D. has been vice-president and head of global medical affairs infertility for the multinational pharmaceutical company Merck (Darmstadt, Germany) since October 2015. He is also a Guest Professor in Reproductive Medicine and Biology at the Department of Development and Regeneration, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven (University of Leuven), Belgium, and an Adjunct Professor at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in the University of Yale, New Haven, USA. This work was initiated before he joined Merck KGaA in October 2015, and completed during the subsequent years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

study registration number at UZ Leuven Clinical Trial Centre: S59221.

Infertility management according to the Endometriosis Fertility Index in patients operated for endometriosis: What is the optimal time frame?

INTRODUCTION

The Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI) is a validated score for predicting the postoperative spontaneous pregnancy rate in patients undergoing endometriosis surgery. However, the practical use of the EFI to advise patients about postoperative fertility management is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients participating in the ENDOQUAL study-a prospective observational bi-center cohort study conducted between 01/2012 and 06/2018-who underwent surgery for infertility were asked to complete a questionnaire collecting time and mode of conception. Statistical analysis was performed with the Fine and Gray model of competing risks and analysis of fertility according to the EFI.

RESULTS

Of the 234 patients analyzed, 104 (44.4%) conceived postoperatively including 58 (55.8%) spontaneous pregnancies. An EFI of 0-4 for spontaneous pregnancies was associated with a lower cumulative pregnancy incidence compared to an EFI of 5-10 (52 versus 34 pregnancies respectively, Subdistribution Hazard Ratio (SHR) = 0.47; 95% CI [0.2; 1.1]; p = 0.08). An EFI of 0-4 was associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate for pregnancies obtained by artificial reproduction technology (ART), compared to an EFI of 5-10 (12 versus 6 pregnancies respectively, SHR = 1.9; CI95% [0.96; 3.8]; p = 0.06). Fecundability decreased from 12 months for EFI 0-4 and from 24 months for EFI 5-10.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis suggests that patients with an unfavorable EFI (≤4) have more ART pregnancies than patients with a favorable EFI (≥5) and should be referred for ART shortly after surgery. Patients with a favorable EFI may attempt spontaneous pregnancy for 24 months before referral.

Spontaneous pregnancy rate following surgery for deep infiltrating endometriosis in infertile women: The impact of the learning curve

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the surgical learning curve impact the spontaneous pregnancy rate in infertile patients undergoing removal of deep infiltrating endometriosis MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single center retrospective study including the first 50 consecutive infertile women suffering from deep infiltrating endometriosis and referred to a single surgeon. All patients underwent laparoscopic removal of deep endometriosis lesions. The study population was stratified in two subgroups, namely the early group (including the first 25 cases) and the late group (comprising the 25 subsequent cases). Pregnancy and live birth rates, surgical morbidity and clinical recurrence rate were compared between study groups.

RESULTS

Overall, spontaneous pregnancy rate (40 % in the early group versus 56 % in the late group, p = 0.25), live birth rate (40 % versus 44 %, p = 0.77) and clinical recurrence rate (16 % versus 4%, p = 0.16) did not significantly differ between the study groups. Logistic regression analysis revealed that ASRM stage, EFI score, and body mass index were the only significant prognostic factors of postoperative spontaneous fertility.

CONCLUSION

Surgical resection of deep infiltrating endometriosis in infertile women is associated with high spontaneous pregnancy and live birth rates. The surgeon's learning curve does not impact postoperative fertility outcomes.

Pathophysiological Basis of Endometriosis-Linked Stress Associated with Pain and Infertility: A Conceptual Review

Women with endometriosis are often under stress due to the associated pain, infertility, inflammation-related and other comorbidities including cancer. Additionally, these women are also under stress due to taboos, myths, inter-personal troubles surrounding infertility and pain of the disease as well as due to frequent incidences of missed diagnosis and treatment recurrence. Often these women suffer from frustration and loss of valuable time in the prime phase of life. All these complexities integral to endometriosis posit a hyperstructure of integrative stress physiology with overt differentials in effective allostatic state in women with disease compared with disease-free women. In the present review, we aim to critically examine various aspects of pathophysiological basis of stress surrounding endometriosis with special emphasis on pain and subfertility that are known to affect the overall health and quality of life of women with the disease and promising pathophysiological basis for its effective management.