Efficacy of isotopic 13CO2 laser laparoscopic evaporation in the treatment of infertile patients with minimal and mild endometriosis: a life table cumulative pregnancy rates study

Prophylactic procedures associated with gynecological surgery for the management of superficial endometriosis and adhesions. Clinical practice guidelines from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF)✰

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines from the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (CNGOF), based on the best currently available evidence, for the prophylactic procedures associated with gynecological surgery for benign disease such as superficial endometriosis lesions and adhesions.

METHODS

The CNGOF has decided to adopt the AGREE II and GRADE systems for grading scientific evidence. Each recommendation for practice was allocated a grade that reflects the quality of evidence (QE) (clinical practice guidelines).

RESULTS

Endometriosis and pelvic pain Superficial endometriosis can be entirely asymptomatic. Surgical treatment of asymptomatic superficial peritoneal endometriosis is not recommended in women of childbearing age for the prevention of pelvic pain, especially in case of proximity to noble organs (e.g., the ureters, rectum and sigmoid, and ovaries in nulligravida) as there is no evidence that the disease will progress to become symptomatic (low level of evidence). In case of accidental discovery of superficial endometriosis in women of childbearing age with pelvic pain, it is recommended that the lesions are excised, if surgically accessible. Removal of superficial endometriosis lesions in patients with painful symptoms improves quality of life and pain (low level of evidence). Endometriosis and infertility It appears that women with isolated superficial endometriosis diagnosed by laparoscopy with histological confirmation have a significantly higher incidence of primary infertility than patients without endometriosis. However, there is no data regarding the impact of treatment of these lesions on the fertility in these women or on the natural course of their disease (low level of evidence). It is recommended that excision is performed rather than monopolar coagulation of superficial endometriosis lesions in infertile women, as this results in a higher spontaneous pregnancy rate (low level of evidence). Adhesions and pelvic pain There is limited data in the literature regarding the benefit of performing systematic adhesiolysis during laparoscopy to prevent pelvic pain when incidental pelvic adhesions are discovered. For patients with pelvic pain, it is probably better not to perform adhesiolysis to prevent pelvic pain, although this can be decided on a case-by-case basis depending on the extent of the adhesions, the topography, and the type of surgery considered (low level of evidence). For asymptomatic patients, it is recommended not to perform adhesiolysis to prevent pelvic pain due to the lack of clear efficacy both short- or long-term and due to the increased risk of surgical injuries (low level of evidence). Adhesions and infertility There is limited data in the literature regarding the potential benefit of performing systematic adhesiolysis when there is an incidental discovery of pelvic adhesions during laparoscopy to prevent infertility. For infertile women, in the event of fortuitous discovery of adhesions at laparoscopy, it is probably better not to perform complex adhesiolysis. Only adhesiolysis of tubo-ovarian adhesions that are minimal or slight in terms of their extension and/or their nature may be useful to improve the chances of spontaneous pregnancy. However, it remains to be decided on a case-by-case basis depending on other potential causes of infertility (low level of evidence). For women without known infertility issues, it is probably better not to perform systematic adhesiolysis in order to improve their pregnancy chances, considering the balance between the unknown benefit and the risks of complications inherent to surgery (low level of evidence).

CONCLUSION

Further investigations are needed in order to increase the quality of management regarding associated interventions such as the treatment of superficial endometriosis or adhesions performed during a gynecologic surgical procedure and, thereby, bolster these recommendations.

Efficacy of ten interventions for endometriosis: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials comparing the efficacy of different interventions for endometriosis are limited and controversial. The aim of the present study is to perform a network meta-analysis on the efficacy of various interventions for endometriosis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Ovid EMBASE through 1 June, 2018, for trials reporting the pain score and 1-year pregnancy rate of patients including at least one pair of direct control group. The mean difference of pain score, odds ratio of 1-year pregnancy rate, and their associated 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to describe efficacy. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to illustrate the rank probability of various treatments for different outcomes, on the basis of network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis enrolled six studies for the evaluation of reducing pain and 10 studies for the 1-year pregnancy rate. All involved trials were sufficiently powered with a low risk of bias. Expectant management (EM), progesterone (PR), and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-agonist (GN) were significantly effective to reduce pain when compared with the placebo; EM ranked the highest on the SUCRA curve. For the 1-year pregnancy rate, no significant difference between the interventions was evident. Ablation ranked the highest with a SUCRA value of 0.6328. The rank of EM was acceptable with a SUCRA value of 0.4452. Our experimental results need to be verified by more high-quality randomized controlled trial articles.

CONCLUSION

Limited available evidence showed that EM, PR, and GN were significantly effective to reduce pain when compared with the placebo. Due to a lack of convincing evidence favoring surgery or medication, we recommend considering EM.

[Minimal and mild endometriosis: Impact of the laparoscopic surgery on pelvic pain and fertility. CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]

Minimal and mild endometriosis (stage 1 and 2 AFSR) can lead to chronic pelvic pain and infertility but can also exist in asymptomatic patients. The prevalence of asymptomatic patients with minimal and mild endometriosis is not clear but typical endometriosis lesions are found in about 5 to 10% of asymptomatic women and more than 50% of painful and/or infertile women. Laparoscopic treatment of minimal and mild endometriotic lesions is justified in case of pelvic pain because their destruction decrease significatively the pain compared with diagnostic laparoscopy alone. In this context, ablation and excision give identical results in terms of pain reduction. Moreover, literature shows no interest in uterine nerve ablation in case of dysmenorrhea due to minimal and mild endometriosis. Then, it is recommended to treat these lesions during a laparoscopy realised as part of pelvic pain. On the other hand, it is not recommended to treat asymptomatic patients. With regard to treatment of minimal and mild endometriosis in infertile patients, only two studies can be selected and both show that laparoscopy with excision or ablation and ablation of adhesions is superior to diagnostic laparoscopy alone in terms of pregnancy rate. However, it is not recommended to treat these lesions when they are asymptomatic because there is no evidence that they can progress with symptomatic disease. There is no study assessing the interest to treat these lesions when they are found fortuitously. Adhesion barrier utilisation permits to reduce post-operative adhesions, however literature failed to demonstrate the clinical profit in terms of reduction of the risk of pain or infertility.

Endometriosis and infertility: how and when to treat?

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial-like tissue (glands or stroma) outside the uterus, which induces a chronic inflammatory reaction. Although endometriosis impairs fertility, it does not usually completely prevent conception. The question of evidence based-medicine guidelines in endometriosis-associated infertility is weak in many situations. Therefore, we will highlight in this issue where the challenges are.

ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis

STUDY QUESTION

What is the optimal management of women with endometriosis based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Using the structured methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, 83 recommendations were formulated that answered the 22 key questions on optimal management of women with endometriosis.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis (2005) has been a reference point for best clinical care in endometriosis for years, but this guideline was in need of updating.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to January 2012 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. To ensure input from women with endometriosis, a patient representative was part of the guideline development group. In addition, patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and review phase of the guideline.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

NA.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The guideline provides 83 recommendations on diagnosis of endometriosis and on the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain and infertility, on the management of women in whom the disease is found incidentally (without pain or infertility), on prevention of recurrence of disease and/or painful symptoms, on treatment of menopausal symptoms in patients with a history of endometriosis and on the possible association of endometriosis and malignancy.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

We identified several areas in care of women with endometriosis for which robust evidence is lacking. These areas were addressed by formulating good practice points (GPP), based on the expert opinion of the guideline group members.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Since 32 out of the 83 recommendations for the management of women with endometriosis could not be based on high level evidence and therefore were GPP, the guideline group formulated research recommendations to guide future research with the aim of increasing the body of evidence.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the implementation of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. All guideline group members disclosed any relevant conflicts of interest (see Conflicts of interest).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NA.

Accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy in the infertility work-up before intrauterine insemination

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy after normal hysterosalpingography (HSG) and before intrauterine insemination (IUI) with respect to laparoscopic findings leading to a change of treatment decisions in couples with male subfertility, cervical hostility, or idiopathic infertility.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

University medical centre.

PATIENT(S)

Infertility patients who had undergone diagnostic laparoscopy after a normal HSG and before IUI in a period of 5 years.

INTERVENTION(S)

Diagnostic laparoscopy in infertility work-up before IUI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Prevalence of laparoscopic findings leading to change in treatment decision.

RESULT(S)

Of 495 patients, 21 (4%) had severe abnormalities that resulted in a change of treatment to in vitro fertilization or open surgery. In 103 patients (21%) abnormalities, endometriosis (stages I and II), and adhesions were directly treated by laparoscopic intervention, followed by IUI treatment. If surgery to remove early stage endometriosis does not improve pregnancy rates, then the laparoscopic yield would be 40 out of 495 (8.1%).

CONCLUSION(S)

Diagnostic laparoscopy altered treatment decisions in an unexpectedly high number of patients before IUI. This suggests that laparoscopy may be of considerable value, provided the change in treatment is effective. Further prospective studies are required to assess whether the diagnostic use of laparoscopy is cost effective and whether interventions as result of laparoscopic findings are effective in improving pregnancy rates.

Laparoscopic surgery for subfertility associated with endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis is the presence of endometrial glands or stroma in sites other than the uterine cavity. It is variable in both its surgical appearance and clinical manifestation often with poor correlation between the two. Surgical treatment of endometriosis aims to remove visible areas of endometriosis and restore anatomy by division of adhesions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of subfertility associated with endometriosis. The review aims to compare outcomes of laparoscopic surgical interventions compared to no treatment or medical treatment with regard to improved fertility.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's specialised register of trials (searched Feb 2000), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2000), MEDLINE (1966-July 2001), EMBASE (1980-July 2001), the National Research Register (Issue 1, 2000) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they were randomised and compared the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of subfertility associated with endometriosis versus other treatment modalities or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two studies had data appropriate for inclusion within the review. These studies compared laparoscopic surgical treatment of minimal and mild endometriosis compared with diagnostic laparoscopy only. The recorded outcomes included live birth, pregnancy, fetal losses and complications of surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

Meta-analysis of the two randomised trials show improvement in infertility associated with endometriosis with laparoscopic surgery. The largest trial (Marcoux 1997) clearly supports this outcome with an increased chance of pregnancy (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.24) and ongoing pregnancy rate after 20 weeks (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.22) but the smaller trial (Gruppo Italiano 1999) does not show benefit (pregnancy OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.88; livebirth OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.28). Combining ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates there was a statistically significant increase with surgery (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.57).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The use of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of minimal and mild endometriosis may improve success rates. The relevant trials have some methodological problems and further research in this area is needed.

[Diagnosis and follow-up of endometriosis during consultation: changes]

In a literature review, news in symptomatology and follow-up of endometriosis were analyzed (infertility, pain, hemorrhage, adnexal tumors). Survey and examination can be made with improved quality (pain scale, menorragha scheme of Higham). Diagnosis and follow-up of endometriosis are more perfect by ultrasonographical examination by the gynecologist in his office. Ultrasonography is better for endometrioma and adenomyosis than other localisation (complementary explorations-magnetic resonance imaging, outside of consultation, are useful for deeper and superficial lesions). In follow-up, clinical research and ultrasonic exploration show the true relapses. Treatment's observance and success will be improved by ultrasonic analysis. Intolerances, add-back therapy, contraception, substitutive hormonal treatment of menopauses and cancer risk, are different problem and solution will be offer.

Laser use and research in gastroenterology, gynecology, and general surgery: a status report

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND DATA

Despite the burgeoning growth of laser applications in dermatology and plastic surgery, applications in other specialties have declined. Laser use in gastroenterology, general surgery, and gynecology was examined over the past 3 years. Future trends and opportunities are discussed.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was scanned for scholarly publications between January 1, 1997, and January 1, 2000, and the number of publications in these specialties was determined. A questionnaire was distributed to 362 general surgeons from the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery (ASLMS) to assess current use and future needs. These results were compared to the actual cases performed at a laser center over the same period.

RESULTS

Of 3,331 publications, 21 (0.6%) covered gastroenterology (GE), general surgery (GS), gynecology (GYN), or laparoscopy (LAP). Keyword citations were 2 GS, 3 GYN, 7 GE, and 12 LAP. Questionnaire results and actual utilization were well correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

Lasers are being used in these specialties despite slow development of novel uses. Opportunities exist for future applications.

Medical and surgical therapies for pain associated with endometriosis

Endometriosis is a common condition for which a number of treatments have been proposed. Medical treatments are based on the hormonal responsiveness of endometriosis implants. These therapies include progestins (with or without estrogens), androgens, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs. Surgical treatments may include hysterectomy with oophorectomy or organ-sparing surgery involving ablation or resection of visible lesions of endometriosis and restoration of pelvic anatomy. There are no studies that directly compare the effectiveness or adverse effects of medical therapy and surgical therapy. Studies on medical therapy compare different treatments with placebo or with other active treatments. Hormone-based therapies for endometriosis show 80%-100% effectiveness in relief of pelvic pain over a 6-month course of therapy. Serious adverse outcomes after medical therapy are unusual. Studies on surgical therapy are largely anecdotal, with noncomparative reports on a variety of surgical methods. A few comparative surgical studies have been reported. Because of the noncomparative nature of many of the surgical studies, the use of combinations of surgical procedures and techniques in the reported studies, and the reporting of results from surgeons with an unusually high level of technical skill, the gynecological practitioner has little basis in the literature for assessing the optimum surgical approach. Surgical complications are believed to be underreported and may be related to how aggressive a surgical procedure is undertaken.

Today's treatments: how do you choose?

OBJECTIVE

To provide a view on how the clinician can select appropriate treatment when managing individual patients with endometriosis.

METHODS

Review of randomized controlled trials and personal experience.

RESULTS

The main determinants of therapy choice are personal experience and patient acceptability. Placebo-controlled trial results support the use of naproxen, dydrogesterone, danazol and leuprolide for pain relief. Laser laparoscopy is more effective than expectant management for pain relief. In direct comparisons, oral contraceptives, Zoladex, danazol, gestrinone, nafarelin and leuprolide have similar efficacies in relieving pain, but have different side-effect profiles. In controlled trials, only laser laparoscopy was shown to improve fertility in minimal/mild disease. The physiological response of bone metabolism to GnRH agonist therapy should be seen in context and the place of add-back regimens understood. The general medical history of the patient must be considered when choosing therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinician must provide the patient with appropriate information on the treatment options to allow her to make an informed choice.