-
Nutrients Aug 2020Zinc is an essential microelement that plays many important functions in the body. It is crucial for the regulation of cell growth, hormone release, immunological...
Zinc is an essential microelement that plays many important functions in the body. It is crucial for the regulation of cell growth, hormone release, immunological response and reproduction. This review focuses on its importance in the reproductive system of women of reproductive and postmenopausal ages, not including its well described role in pregnancy. Only recently, attention has been drawn to the potential role of zinc in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), dysmenorrhea, or endometriosis. This review is mainly based on 36 randomized, controlled studies on reproductive, pre- and post-menopausal populations of women and on research trying to explain the potential impact of zinc and its supplementation in the etiology of selected female reproductive system disorders. In women with PCOS, zinc supplementation has a positive effect on many parameters, especially those related to insulin resistance and lipid balance. In primary dysmenorrhea, zinc supplementation before and during each menstrual cycle seems to be an important factor reducing the intensity of menstrual pain. On the other hand, little is known of the role of zinc in endometriosis and in postmenopausal women. Therefore, further studies explaining the potential impact of zinc and its supplementation on female reproductive system would be highly advisable and valuable.
Topics: Adult; Dietary Supplements; Dysmenorrhea; Endometriosis; Female; Humans; Insulin Resistance; Lipid Metabolism; Male; Menstrual Cycle; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Pregnancy; Reproduction; Zinc
PubMed: 32824334
DOI: 10.3390/nu12082464 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is excessive menstrual blood loss that interferes with women's quality of life, regardless of the absolute amount of bleeding. It is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is excessive menstrual blood loss that interferes with women's quality of life, regardless of the absolute amount of bleeding. It is a very common condition in women of reproductive age, affecting 2 to 5 of every 10 women. Diverse treatments, either medical (hormonal or non-hormonal) or surgical, are currently available for HMB, with different effectiveness, acceptability, costs and side effects. The best treatment will depend on the woman's age, her intention to become pregnant, the presence of other symptoms, and her personal views and preferences.
OBJECTIVES
To identify, systematically assess and summarise all evidence from studies included in Cochrane Reviews on treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), using reviews with comparable participants and outcomes; and to present a ranking of the first- and second-line treatments for HMB.
METHODS
We searched for published Cochrane Reviews of HMB interventions in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The primary outcomes were menstrual bleeding and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, adverse events and the requirement of further treatment. Two review authors independently selected the systematic reviews, extracted data and assessed quality, resolving disagreements by discussion. We assessed review quality using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods. We grouped the interventions into first- and second-line treatments, considering participant characteristics (desire for future pregnancy, failure of previous treatment, candidacy for surgery). First-line treatments included medical interventions, and second-line treatments included both the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and surgical treatments; thus the LNG-IUS is included in both groups. We developed different networks for first- and second-line treatments. We performed network meta-analyses of all outcomes, except for quality of life, where we performed pairwise meta-analyses. We reported the mean rank, the network estimates for mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the certainty of evidence (moderate, low or very low certainty). We also analysed different endometrial ablation and resection techniques separately from the main network: transcervical endometrial resection (TCRE) with or without rollerball, other resectoscopic endometrial ablation (REA), microwave non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation (NREA), hydrothermal ablation NREA, bipolar NREA, balloon NREA and other NREA.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library up to July 2021. We updated the reviews that were over two years old. In July 2020, we started the overview with no new reviews about the topic. The included medical interventions were: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid), combined oral contraceptives (COC), combined vaginal ring (CVR), long-cycle and luteal oral progestogens, LNG-IUS, ethamsylate and danazol (included to provide indirect evidence), which were compared to placebo. Surgical interventions were: open (abdominal), minimally invasive (vaginal or laparoscopic) and unspecified (or surgeon's choice of route of) hysterectomy, REA, NREA, unspecified endometrial ablation (EA) and LNG-IUS. We grouped the interventions as follows. First-line treatments Evidence from 26 studies with 1770 participants suggests that LNG-IUS results in a large reduction of menstrual blood loss (MBL; mean rank 2.4, MD -105.71 mL/cycle, 95% CI -201.10 to -10.33; low certainty evidence); antifibrinolytics probably reduce MBL (mean rank 3.7, MD -80.32 mL/cycle, 95% CI -127.67 to -32.98; moderate certainty evidence); long-cycle progestogen reduces MBL (mean rank 4.1, MD -76.93 mL/cycle, 95% CI -153.82 to -0.05; low certainty evidence), and NSAIDs slightly reduce MBL (mean rank 6.4, MD -40.67 mL/cycle, -84.61 to 3.27; low certainty evidence; reference comparator mean rank 8.9). We are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions and the sensitivity analysis for reduction of MBL, as the evidence was rated as very low certainty. We are uncertain of the true effect of any intervention (very low certainty evidence) on the perception of improvement and satisfaction. Second-line treatments Bleeding reduction is related to the type of hysterectomy (total or supracervical/subtotal), not the route, so we combined all routes of hysterectomy for bleeding outcomes. We assessed the reduction of MBL without imputed data (11 trials, 1790 participants) and with imputed data (15 trials, 2241 participants). Evidence without imputed data suggests that hysterectomy (mean rank 1.2, OR 25.71, 95% CI 1.50 to 439.96; low certainty evidence) and REA (mean rank 2.8, OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.29 to 5.66; low certainty evidence) result in a large reduction of MBL, and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.0, OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.53 to 7.23; moderate certainty evidence). Evidence with imputed data suggests hysterectomy results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 1.0, OR 14.31, 95% CI 2.99 to 68.56; low certainty evidence), and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.2, OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.29 to 6.05; moderate certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the true effect for REA (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea (very low certainty evidence). Evidence from 27 trials with 4284 participants suggests that minimally invasive hysterectomy results in a large increase in satisfaction (mean rank 1.3, OR 7.96, 95% CI 3.33 to 19.03; low certainty evidence), and NREA also increases satisfaction (mean rank 3.6, OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.33; low certainty evidence), but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions (very low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence suggests LNG-IUS is the best first-line treatment for reducing menstrual blood loss (MBL); antifibrinolytics are probably the second best, and long-cycle progestogens are likely the third best. We cannot make conclusions about the effect of first-line treatments on perception of improvement and satisfaction, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. For second-line treatments, evidence suggests hysterectomy is the best treatment for reducing bleeding, followed by REA and NREA. We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. Minimally invasive hysterectomy may result in a large increase in satisfaction, and NREA also increases satisfaction, but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining second-line interventions, as evidence was rated as very low certainty.
Topics: Amenorrhea; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Child, Preschool; Female; Humans; Menorrhagia; Network Meta-Analysis; Progestins; Quality of Life; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 35638592
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013180.pub2 -
Fertility and Sterility Apr 2023The necessity of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support (LPS) in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (NC-FET) cycles warrants further confirmation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The effect of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.
IMPORTANCE
The necessity of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support (LPS) in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (NC-FET) cycles warrants further confirmation.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effect of progesterone supplementation for LPS on the reproductive outcomes of patients undergoing NC-FET cycles.
DATA SOURCES
The PubMed, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM were electronically searched. The search time frame was from inception up to September 2022.
STUDY SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used progesterone for LPS in NC-FET cycles, including true NC-FET cycles (tNC-FET) and modified NC-FET cycles (mNC-FET), were included. The counted data were analyzed using relative risk (RR) as the effect-size statistic, and each effect size was assigned its 95% confidence interval (CI).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
The primary outcomes were the live birth rate (LBR) and the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and the secondary outcome was the miscarriage rate.
RESULTS
Four RCTs were included, which involved 1116 participants. The results of the meta-analysis showed that progesterone supplementation was associated with increased LBR (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15-1.75; I = 0%, moderate-quality evidence) and CPR (RR, 1.30, 95% CI, 1.07-1.57; I = 0%, moderate-quality evidence) in patients undergoing NC-FET cycles. Subgroup analysis showed that progesterone supplementation was associated with higher LBR and CPR in tNC-FET cycles. However, no association was found between increased LBR and CPR in mNC-FET cycles. In addition, only one RCT reported that oral dydrogesterone had similar CPR and miscarriage rate compared with vaginal progesterone in mNC-FET cycles.
CONCLUSION(S)
Overall, moderate-quality evidence suggested that progesterone supplementation for LPS was associated with increased LBR and CPR in NC-FET cycles. Progesterone supplementation was associated with a higher LBR and CPR in tNC-FET cycles. However, the effectiveness of progesterone supplementation in mNC-FET cycles should be further verified by larger RCTs. Low to very low-quality evidence indicated that oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone have similar reproductive outcomes in mNC-FET cycles, which requires further study, especially in tNC-FET cycles.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42022355550 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=355550) was registered on September 3, 2022.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Progesterone; Luteal Phase; Abortion, Spontaneous; Dydrogesterone; Pregnancy Rate; Lipopolysaccharides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Embryo Transfer; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 36574915
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.12.035 -
Human Reproduction Update Sep 2023The number of frozen embryo transfers (FET) has increased dramatically over the past decade. Based on current evidence, there is no difference in pregnancy rates when... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The number of frozen embryo transfers (FET) has increased dramatically over the past decade. Based on current evidence, there is no difference in pregnancy rates when natural cycle FET (NC-FET) is compared to artificial cycle FET (AC-FET) in subfertile women. However, NC-FET seems to be associated with lower risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET cycles. Currently, there is no consensus about whether NC-FET needs to be combined with luteal phase support (LPS) or not. The question of how to prepare the endometrium for FET has now gained even more importance and taken the dimension of safety into account as it should not simply be reduced to the basic question of effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE
The objective of this project was to determine whether NC-FET, with or without LPS, decreases the risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET.
SEARCH METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out. A literature search was performed using the following databases: CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE from inception to 10 October 2022. Observational studies, including cohort studies, and registries comparing obstetric and neonatal outcomes between singleton pregnancies after NC-FET and those after AC-FET were sought. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. We calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs), pooled risk differences (RDs), pooled adjusted ORs, and prevalence estimates with 95% CI using a random effect model, while heterogeneity was assessed by the I2.
OUTCOMES
The conducted search identified 2436 studies, 890 duplicates were removed and 1546 studies were screened. Thirty studies (NC-FET n = 56 445; AC-FET n = 57 231) were included, 19 of which used LPS in NC-FET. Birthweight was lower following NC-FET versus AC-FET (mean difference 26.35 g; 95% CI 11.61-41.08, I2 = 63%). Furthermore NC-FET compared to AC-FET resulted in a lower risk of large for gestational age (OR 0.88, 95% 0.83-0.94, I2 = 54%), macrosomia (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.71-0.93, I2 = 68%), low birthweight (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.85, I2 = 41%), early pregnancy loss (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.61-0.86, I2 = 70%), preterm birth (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.85, I2 = 20%), very preterm birth (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53-0.84, I2 = 0%), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50-0.65, I2 = 61%), pre-eclampsia (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.42-0.60, I2 = 44%), placenta previa (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.97, I2 = 0%), and postpartum hemorrhage (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.38-0.48, I2 = 53%). Stratified analyses on LPS use in NC-FET suggested that, compared to AC-FET, NC-FET with LPS decreased preterm birth risk, while NC-FET without LPS did not (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.81). LPS use did not modify the other outcomes. Heterogeneity varied from low to high, while quality of the evidence was very low to moderate.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS
This study confirms that NC-FET decreases the risk of adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes compared with AC-FET. We estimate that for each adverse outcome, use of NC-FET may prevent 4 to 22 cases per 1000 women. Consequently, NC-FET should be the preferred treatment in women with ovulatory cycles undergoing FET. Based on very low quality of evidence, the risk of preterm birth be decreased when LPS is used in NC-FET compared to AC-FET. However, because of many uncertainties-the major being the debate about efficacy of the use of LPS-future research is needed on efficacy and safety of LPS and no recommendation can be made about the use of LPS.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Female; Humans; Birth Weight; Premature Birth; Luteal Phase; Lipopolysaccharides; Cryopreservation; Embryo Transfer; Pregnancy Rate; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37172270
DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmad011 -
Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences May 2020Recent evidence suggests that follicular development occurs in a wave-like model during the ovarian cycle, where up to three cohorts of follicles are recruited to...
DuoStim - a reproducible strategy to obtain more oocytes and competent embryos in a short time-frame aimed at fertility preservation and IVF purposes. A systematic review.
Recent evidence suggests that follicular development occurs in a wave-like model during the ovarian cycle, where up to three cohorts of follicles are recruited to complete folliculogenesis. This understanding overtakes the previous dogma stating that follicles grow only during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. Therefore, in fertilization (IVF), novel protocols regarding ovarian stimulation have been theorized based on the use of gonadotrophins to prompt the growth of antral follicles at any stage of the menstrual cycle. These unconventional protocols for ovarian stimulation aim at a more efficient management of poor-prognosis patients, otherwise exposed to conflicting outcomes after conventional approaches. DuoStim appears among these unconventional stimulation protocols as one of the most promising. It combines two consecutive stimulations in the follicular and luteal phases of the same ovarian cycle, aimed at increasing the number of oocytes retrieved and embryos produced in the short time-frame. This protocol has been suggested for the treatment of all conditions requiring a maximal and urgent exploitation of the ovarian reserve, such as oncological patients and poor responders at an advanced maternal age. At present, data from independent studies have outlined the consistency and reproducibility of this approach, which might also reduce the drop-out between consecutive failed IVF cycles in poor-prognosis patients. However, the protocol must be standardized, and more robust studies and cost-benefit analyses are needed to highlight the true clinical pros and cons deriving from DuoStim implementation in IVF.
Topics: Clinical Protocols; Fertility Preservation; Fertilization in Vitro; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Ovulation Induction
PubMed: 32338123
DOI: 10.1080/03009734.2020.1734694 -
Nutrients Sep 2019Most studies that have shown the positive effects of caffeine supplementation on sports performance have been carried out on men. However, the differences between sexes...
Most studies that have shown the positive effects of caffeine supplementation on sports performance have been carried out on men. However, the differences between sexes are evident in terms of body size, body composition, and hormonal functioning, which might cause different outcomes on performance for the same dosage of caffeine intake in men vs. women. The main aim of this systematic review was to analyze and compare the effects of caffeine intake between men and women on sports performance to provide a source of knowledge to sports practitioners and coaches, especially for those working with women athletes, on the use of caffeine as an ergogenic aid. A structured search was carried out following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines in the Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases until 28 July 2019. The search included studies in which the effects of caffeine supplementation on athletic performance were compared between sexes and to an identical placebo situation (dose, duration and timing). No filters were applied for participants' physical fitness level or age. A total of 254 articles were obtained in the initial search. When applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final sample was 10 articles. The systematic review concluded that four investigations (100% of the number of investigations on this topic) had not found differences between sexes in terms of caffeine supplementation on aerobic performance and 3/3 (100%) on the fatigue index. However, four out of seven articles (57.1%) showed that the ergogenicity of caffeine for anaerobic performance was higher in men than women. In particular, it seems that men are able to produce more power, greater total weight lifted and more speed with the same dose of caffeine than women. In summary, caffeine supplementation produced a similar ergogenic benefit for aerobic performance and the fatigue index in men and women athletes. Nevertheless, the effects of caffeine to produce more power, total weight lifted and to improve sprint performance with respect to a placebo was higher in men than women athletes despite the same dose of caffeine being administered. Thus, the ergogenic effect of acute caffeine intake on anaerobic performance might be higher in men than in women.
Topics: Adult; Caffeine; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Contraction; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Performance-Enhancing Substances; Physical Endurance; Sex Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 31574901
DOI: 10.3390/nu11102313 -
Medicine Apr 2020Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects reproductive-aged women and is associated with increased prevalence of serious clinical problems including: reproductive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects reproductive-aged women and is associated with increased prevalence of serious clinical problems including: reproductive implications, metabolic dysfunction, and cardiovascular risk. Physical activity offers several health benefits for women with PCOS. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize evidence on the effect of different types of exercise on reproductive function and body composition for women with PCOS.
METHODS
This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) following recommended review methods. We searched 6 databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature; Embase; MEDLINE (via Ovid); PubMed; Sport Discus; and Web of Science; and we developed search strategies using a combination of Medical Subject Headings terms and text words related to exercise interventions for women with PCOS. There was no restriction on language or publication year. The search was conducted on April 16, 2019 and updated on November 15, 2019. Two authors independently screened citations, determined risk of bias and quality of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. We conducted meta-analyses following recommended guidelines, and report results using standardized mean difference (SMD).
RESULTS
Ten RCTs (n = 533) were included in this review. Studies tested the following interventions: aerobic, resistance, and combined (aerobic/resistance) training programs. Most studies were small (average 32, range 15-124 participants), and of relatively short duration (8-32 weeks). There was high heterogeneity for outcomes of reproductive function (menstrual cycle, ovulation, and fertility). We noted low certainty evidence for little to no effect of exercise on reproductive hormones and moderate certainty evidence that aerobic exercise reduced body mass index (BMI) in women with PCOS: BMI SMD -0.35, 95% confidence interval -0.56 to -0.14, P = .001.
CONCLUSION
For women with PCOS, evidence is limited to discern the effect of exercise on major health outcomes (e.g., reproductive function). There is moderate certainty evidence that aerobic exercise alone is beneficial for reducing BMI in women with PCOS. Future studies should be conducted with longer duration, larger sample sizes, and should provide detailed information on menstrual cycle and fertility outcomes.PROSPERO Systematic review registration: 2017 CRD42017058869.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32311937
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019644 -
Reproductive Biomedicine Online Aug 2019This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) by... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) by comparing their effect with that of metformin. Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, WanFang Database, CNKI) dating from their establishment to June 2018 were searched to find all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy of GLP-1 receptor agonists versus metformin for patients with PCOS. Therapeutic variables included menstrual cycle, sex hormone and clinical manifestations, glucose metabolism and other metabolic indexes. Eight RCTs among 462 related articles were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with metformin, GLP-1 receptor agonists were more effective in improving insulin sensitivity (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.74 to -0.06, P = 0.02) and reducing body mass index (SMD -1.02, 95% CI -1.85 to -0.19, P = 0.02) and abdominal girth (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.00, P = 0.05). GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with a higher incidence of nausea and headache than metformin, but there were no significant differences in other data. Therefore, compared with metformin, GLP-1 receptor agonists might be a good choice for obese patients with PCOS, especially those with insulin resistance. The available evidence is, however, inconclusive given its moderate to low quality. More high-quality research is needed to assess the efficacy of a GLP-1 receptor agonist on women with PCOS.
Topics: Adult; Androgens; Blood Glucose; Female; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Homeostasis; Humans; Metformin; Obesity; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reproducibility of Results; Sample Size; Testosterone; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 31229399
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.04.017 -
Nutrients Jun 2023Dysmenorrhea causes pain and inconvenience during menstruation. In addition to medication, natural compounds are widely used to relieve various types of pain. In this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Dysmenorrhea causes pain and inconvenience during menstruation. In addition to medication, natural compounds are widely used to relieve various types of pain. In this study, we aimed to assess the effects of vitamin D (vit. D) supplementation in relieving the symptoms of primary dysmenorrhea. A comprehensive systematic database search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Oral forms of vit. D supplementation were included and compared with a placebo or standard care. The degree of dysmenorrhea pain was measured with a visual analogue scale or numerical rating scale. Outcomes were compared using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in a meta-analysis. RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias v2 (RoB 2) tool. The meta-analysis included 8 randomized controlled trials involving 695 participants. The results of the quantitative analysis showed a significantly lower degree of pain in the vit. D versus placebo in those with dysmenorrhea (SMD: -1.404, 95% CI: -2.078 to -0.731). The results of subgroup analysis revealed that pain lessened when the average weekly dose of vit. D was over 50,000 IU, in which dysmenorrhea was relieved regardless of whether vit. D was administered for more or less than 70 days and in any dose interval. The results revealed that vit. D treatment substantially reduced the pain level in the primary dysmenorrhea population. We concluded that vit. D supplementation is an alternative treatment for relieving the pain symptoms of dysmenorrhea.
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Menstruation; Vitamin D; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 37447156
DOI: 10.3390/nu15132830 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Jan 2024Resistance exercise training is widely used by general and athletic populations to increase skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength. Endogenous sex hormones... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The Effect of Hormonal Contraceptive Use on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy, Power and Strength Adaptations to Resistance Exercise Training: A Systematic Review and Multilevel Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Resistance exercise training is widely used by general and athletic populations to increase skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength. Endogenous sex hormones influence various bodily functions, including possibly exercise performance, and may influence adaptive changes in response to exercise training. Hormonal contraceptive (HC) use modulates the profile of endogenous sex hormones, and therefore, there is increasing interest in the impact, if any, of HC use on adaptive responses to resistance exercise training.
OBJECTIVE
Our aim is to provide a quantitative synthesis of the effect of HC use on skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength adaptations in response to resistance exercise training.
METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted on experimental studies which directly compared skeletal muscle hypertrophy, power and strength adaptations following resistance exercise training in hormonal contraceptive users and non-users conducted before July 2023. The search using the online databases PUBMED, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Embase and other supplementary search strategies yielded 4669 articles, with 8 articles (54 effects and 325 participants) meeting the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the "Tool for the assessment of study quality and reporting in exercise".
RESULTS
All included studies investigated the influence of oral contraceptive pills (OCP), with no study including participants using other forms of HC. The articles were analysed using a meta-analytic multilevel maximum likelihood estimator model. The results indicate that OCP use does not have a significant effect on hypertrophy [0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) [- 0.11, 0.13], t = 0.14, p = 0.90), power (- 0.04, 95% CI [- 0.93, 0.84], t = - 0.29, p = 0.80) or strength (0.10, 95% CI [- 0.08, 0.28], t = 1.48, p = 0.20).
DISCUSSION
Based on the present analysis, there is no evidence-based rationale to advocate for or against the use of OCPs in females partaking in resistance exercise training to increase hypertrophy, power and/or strength. Rather, an individualised approach considering an individual's response to OCPs, their reasons for use and menstrual cycle history may be more appropriate.
REGISTRATION
The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID number and hyperlink: CRD42022365677).
Topics: Female; Humans; Contraceptives, Oral; Gonadal Steroid Hormones; Hypertrophy; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Resistance Training
PubMed: 37755666
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01911-3