-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2009Endometriosis is characterized by the presence of tissue that is morphologically and biologically similar to normal endometrium in locations outside the uterus. Surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Endometriosis is characterized by the presence of tissue that is morphologically and biologically similar to normal endometrium in locations outside the uterus. Surgical and hormonal treatment of endometriosis have unpleasant side effects and high rates of relapse. In China, treatment of endometriosis using Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) is routine and considerable research into the role of CHM in alleviating pain, promoting fertility, and preventing relapse has taken place.
OBJECTIVES
To review the effectiveness and safety of CHM in alleviating endometriosis-related pain and infertility.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library) and the following English language electronic databases (from their inception to the present): MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, NLH on the 30/04/09.We also searched Chinese language electronic databases: Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Sci & Tech Journals (VIP), Traditional Chinese Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (TCMLARS), and Chinese Medical Current Contents (CMCC).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving CHM versus placebo, biomedical treatment, another CHM intervention, or CHM plus biomedical treatment versus biomedical treatment were selected. Only trials with confirmed randomisation procedures and laparoscopic diagnosis of endometriosis were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Risk of bias assessment, and data extraction and analysis were performed independently by three review authors. Data were combined for meta-analysis using relative risk (RR) for dichotomous data. A fixed-effect statistical model was used, where appropriate. Data not suitable for meta-analysis are presented as descriptive data.
MAIN RESULTS
Two Chinese RCTs involving 158 women were included in this review. Both these trials described adequate methodology. Neither trial compared CHM with placebo treatment.There was no evidence of a significant difference in rates of symptomatic relief between CHM and gestrinone administered subsequent to laparoscopic surgery (95.65% versus 93.87%; risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.12, one RCT). The intention-to-treat analysis also showed no significant difference between the groups (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.18). There was no significant difference between the CHM and gestrinone groups with regard to the total pregnancy rate (69.6% versus 59.1%; RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.59, one RCT).CHM administered orally and then in conjunction with a herbal enema resulted in a greater proportion of women obtaining symptomatic relief than with danazol (RR 5.06, 95% CI 1.28 to 20.05; RR 5.63, 95% CI 1.47 to 21.54, respectively).Overall, 100% of women in all the groups showed some improvement in their symptoms.Oral plus enema administration of CHM showed a greater reduction in average dysmenorrhoea pain scores than did danazol (mean difference (MD) -2.90, 95% CI -4.55 to -1.25; P < 0.01).Combined oral and enema administration of CHM showed a greater improvement, measured as the disappearance or shrinkage of adnexal masses, than with danazol (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.78). For lumbosacral pain, rectal discomfort, or vaginal nodules tenderness, there was no significant difference either between CHM and danazol.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Post-surgical administration of CHM may have comparable benefits to gestrinone but with fewer side effects. Oral CHM may have a better overall treatment effect than danazol; it may be more effective in relieving dysmenorrhea and shrinking adnexal masses when used in conjunction with a CHM enema. However, more rigorous research is required to accurately assess the potential role of CHM in treating endometriosis.
Topics: Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Endometriosis; Female; Gestrinone; Humans; Pelvic Pain; Progestins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 19588398
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006568.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Endometriosis is a gynaecological condition that presents either with the problem of infertility or with painful symptoms. The clinical observation of an apparent... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endometriosis is a gynaecological condition that presents either with the problem of infertility or with painful symptoms. The clinical observation of an apparent resolution of symptoms during pregnancy gave rise to the concept of treating patients with a pseudo-pregnancy regime. Initially combinations of high dose oestrogens and progestagens were used but this was subsequently replaced by progestogens alone. More recently progestogens of both progestagens and anti-progestagens in the treatment of symptomatiprogestogenssis
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of both the progestagens and anti-progestagens in the treatment of painful symptoms ascribed to the diagnosis of endometriosis.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The search strategy of the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group was utilised to identify all publications which described or might have described randomised trials of any progestagen or any anti-progestagen in the treatment of symptomatic endometriosis.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Trials were included if they were randomised and considered the effectiveness of either a progestagen or an anti-progestagen in the treatment of painful symptoms associated with endometriosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Seven studies were considered to be appropriate for inclusion in this review. Only three studies evaluating progestagens were included (comparison with placebo, danazol and oral contraceptive plus danazol). All other studies compared the anti-progestagen, gestrinone, with other medical therapies.
MAIN RESULTS
Progestagens appear to be an effective therapy for the painful symptoms associated with endometriosis. Gestrinone is as effective as other established medical therapies (danazol and GnRH analogues).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
The limited available data suggests that both continuous progestagens and anti-progestagens are effective therapies in the treatment of painful symptoms associated with endometriosis. Progestagens given in the luteal phase are not effective. These conclusions should be accepted cautiously due to a lack of data.
Topics: Dydrogesterone; Endometriosis; Female; Gestrinone; Humans; Medroxyprogesterone Acetate; Pain; Progesterone Congeners; Progestins
PubMed: 10796864
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002122 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2009Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is a common hematologic disorder caused by immune-mediated thrombocytopenia. The magnitude of the maternal-fetal risk of ITP... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is a common hematologic disorder caused by immune-mediated thrombocytopenia. The magnitude of the maternal-fetal risk of ITP during pregnancy is controversial. Labour management of pregnant women with ITP remains controversial. Management of ITP during pregnancy is complex because of the disparity between maternal and fetal platelet counts.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, vinca alkaloids, danazol, dapsone, and any other types of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura during pregnancy.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2009), LILACS (1982 to 8 February 2009), ClinicalTrials.gov (8 February 2009), Current Controlled Trials (16 February 2009), Google Scholar (16 February 2009) and ongoing and unpublished trials cited in the reference lists of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on any medical treatments for idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura during pregnancy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion or by consulting a third review author.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included one RCT in which 38 women (41 pregnancies) were randomised, with only 26 women (28 pregnancies) being analysed.This RCT comparing the effect of betamethasone (1.5 mg/day) with no medication found no statistically significant difference in neonatal thrombocytopenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 2.05) and neonatal bleeding (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.13). Review authors conducted an intention-to-treat analysis which showed similar findings: RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.45 and RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.24 to 4.61, respectively. Maternal death, perinatal mortality, postpartum haemorrhage and neonatal intracranial haemorrhage were not studied by this RCT.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence indicates that compared to no medication, betamethasone did not reduce the risk of neonatal thrombocytopenia and neonatal bleeding in ITP during pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of betamethasone for treating ITP. This Cohrane review does not provide evidence about other medical treatments for ITP during pregnancy. This systematic review also identifies the need for well-designed, adequately powered randomised clinical trials for this medical condition during pregnancy. Unless randomised clinical trials provide evidence of a treatment effect and the trade off between potential benefits and harms are established, policy-makers, clinicians, and academics should not use betamethasone for ITP in pregnant women. Any future trials on medical treatments for treating ITP during pregnancy should test a variety of important maternal, neonatal or both outcome measures, including maternal death, perinatal mortality, postpartum haemorrhage and neonatal intracranial haemorrhage.
Topics: Betamethasone; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Hematologic; Purpura, Thrombocytopenic, Idiopathic; Thrombocytopenia, Neonatal Alloimmune
PubMed: 19821437
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007722.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a menstrual blood loss perceived by women as excessive that affects the health of women of reproductive age, interfering with their...
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a menstrual blood loss perceived by women as excessive that affects the health of women of reproductive age, interfering with their physical, emotional, social and material quality of life. Whilst abnormal menstrual bleeding may be associated with underlying pathology, in the present context, HMB is defined as excessive menstrual bleeding in the absence of other systemic or gynaecological disease. The first-line therapy is usually medical, avoiding possibly unnecessary surgery. Of the wide variety of medications used to reduce HMB, oral progestogens were originally the most commonly prescribed agents. This review assesses the effectiveness of two different types and regimens of oral progestogens in reducing ovulatory HMB.This is the update of a Cochrane review last updated in 2007, and originally named "Effectiveness of cyclical progestagen therapy in reducing heavy menstrual bleeding" (1998).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of oral progestogen therapy taken either during the luteal phase (short cycle) or for a longer course of 21 days per cycle (long cycle), in achieving a reduction in menstrual blood loss in women of reproductive age with HMB.
SEARCH METHODS
In January 2019 we searched Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility's specialized register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycInfo. We also searched trials registers, other sources of unpublished or grey literature and reference lists of retrieved trials. We also checked citation lists of review articles to identify trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments for HMB that included cyclical oral progestogens were eligible.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trials for risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted trial authors for clarification of methods or additional data when necessary. We only assessed adverse events if they were separately measured in the included trials. We compared cyclical oral progestogen in different regimens and placebo or other treatments. Our primary outcomes were menstrual blood loss and satisfaction with treatment; the secondary outcomes were number of days of bleeding, quality of life, compliance and acceptability of treatment, adverse events and costs.
MAIN RESULTS
This review identified 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 1071 women in total. Most of the women knew which treatment they were receiving, which may have influenced their judgements about menstrual blood loss and satisfaction. Other aspects of trial quality varied among trials.We did not identify any RCTs comparing progestogen treatment with placebo. We assessed comparisons between oral progestogens and other medical therapies separately according to different regimens.Short-cycle progestogen therapy during the luteal phase (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone for 7 to 10 days, from day 15 to 19) was inferior to other medical therapy, including tranexamic acid, danazol and the progestogen-releasing intrauterine system (Pg-IUS (off of the market since 2001)), releasing 60 mcg of progesterone daily, with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss (mean difference (MD) 37.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 17.67 to 56.91; I = 50%; 6 trials, 145 women). The rate of satisfaction and the quality of life with treatment was similar in both groups. The number of bleeding days was greater on the short cycle progestogen group compared to other medical treatments. Adverse events (such as gastrointestinal symptoms and weight gain) were more likely with danazol when compared with progestogen treatment. We note that danazol is no longer in general use for treating HMB.Long-cycle progestogen therapy (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone), from day 5 to day 26 of the menstrual cycle, is also inferior to the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), releasing tranexamic acid and ormeloxifene, but may be similar to the combined vaginal ring with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss (MD 16.88, 95% CI 10.93 to 22.84; I = 87%; 4 trials, 355 women). A higher proportion of women taking norethisterone found their treatment unacceptable compared to women having Pg-IUS (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.40; 1 trial, 40 women). However, the adverse effects of breast tenderness and intermenstrual bleeding were more likely in women with the LNG-IUS. No trials reported on days of bleeding or quality of life for this comparison.The evidence supporting these findings was limited by low or very low gradings of quality; thus, we are uncertain about the findings and there is a potential that they may change if we identify other trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low- or very low-quality evidence suggests that short-course progestogen was inferior to other medical therapy, including tranexamic acid, danazol and the Pg-IUS with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss. Long cycle progestogen therapy (medroxyprogesterone acetate or norethisterone) was also inferior to the LNG-IUS, tranexamic acid and ormeloxifene, but may be similar to the combined vaginal ring with respect to reduction of menstrual blood loss.
Topics: Danazol; Female; Humans; Intrauterine Devices, Medicated; Medroxyprogesterone Acetate; Menorrhagia; Progesterone; Progestins; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 31425626
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001016.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2003Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) are generally well tolerated, and are effective in relieving the symptoms of endometriosis (Prentice 2003).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) are generally well tolerated, and are effective in relieving the symptoms of endometriosis (Prentice 2003). Unfortunately the low oestrogen state that they induce is associated with adverse effects including an acceleration in bone mineral density (BMD) loss.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of treatment with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) on the bone mineral density of women with endometriosis, compared to placebo, no treatment, or other treatments for endometriosis, including GnRHas with add-back therapy.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's specialised register of controlled trials (23rd October 2002) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library, issue 4, 2002). We also carried out electronic searches of MEDLINE (1966 - March Week 2 2003) and EMBASE (1980 - March Week 2 2003). We also searched the reference lists of articles and contacted researchers in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Prospective, randomised controlled studies of the use of GnRHas for the treatment of women with endometriosis were considered, where bone density measurements were an end point. The control arm of the studies was either placebo, no treatment, another medical therapy for endometriosis, or GnRHas with add-back therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers (JF and MS) independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty studies involving 2,391 women were included, however only 15, involving 910 women, could be included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that danazol and progesterone + oestrogen add-back are protective of BMD at the lumbar spine both during treatment and for up to six and twelve months after treatment, respectively. Between the groups receiving GnRHa and the groups receiving danazol/gestrinone, there was a significant difference in percentage change of BMD after six months of treatment, the GnRH analogue producing a reduction in BMD from baseline and danazol producing an increase in BMD (SMD -3.43, 95 % CI -3.91 to -2.95). Progesterone only add-back is not protective; after six months of treatment absolute value BMD measurements of the lumbar spine did not differ significantly from the group receiving GnRH analogues (SMD 0.15, 95 % CI -0.21 to 0.52). In the comparison of GnRHa versus GnRHa + HRT add-back, that is oestrogen + progesterone or oestrogen only, there was a significantly bigger BMD loss in the GnRHa only group (SMD -0.49, 95 % CI -0.77 to -0.21). These numbers reflect the absolute value measurements at the lumbar spine after six months of treatment. Due to the small number of studies in the comparison we are unable to conclude whether calcium-regulating agents are protective. No difference was found between low and high dose add-back regimes but again only one study was identified for this comparison. Only one study comparing GnRH analogues with placebo was identified, but the study gave no data. No studies comparing GnRH with the oral contraceptive pill (OCP) or progestagens were identified.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Both danazol and progesterone + oestrogen add-back have been shown to be protective of BMD, while on treatment and up to six and 12 months later, respectively. However, by 24 months of follow-up there was no difference in BMD in those women who had HRT add-back. Studies of danazol versus GnRHa did not report long-term follow-up. The significant side effects associated with danazol limit its use.
Topics: Bone Density; Danazol; Endometriosis; Estrogen Antagonists; Female; Femur Neck; Gestrinone; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Manipulation, Spinal; Progesterone
PubMed: 14583930
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001297 -
Pre-operative endometrial thinning agents before hysteroscopic surgery for heavy menstrual bleeding.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Menorrhagia is one of the most common reasons for pre-menopausal women to be referred to a gynaecologist. Although medical therapy is generally the first approach, many... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Menorrhagia is one of the most common reasons for pre-menopausal women to be referred to a gynaecologist. Although medical therapy is generally the first approach, many will eventually require or request a hysterectomy. Hysterectomy is associated with a significant in-patient hospital stay and a period of convalescence that makes it an unattractive and unnecessarily invasive option for many women. Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation or resection offers a day-case surgical alternative to hysterectomy for these women. It is also a cheaper procedure than hysterectomy. Complete endometrial removal or destruction is one of the most important determinants of treatment success. Therefore surgery will be most effective if undertaken when endometrial thickness is less than 4mm, in the immediate post-menstrual phase, however there are often difficulties in reliably arranging surgery for this time. The other option is the use of hormonal agents which induce endometrial thinning or atrophy prior to surgery. The most commonly evaluated agents have been goserelin (a GnRH analogue) and danazol. Progestogens and other GnRH analogues have also been studied although less data are available. It has been suggested that the use of these agents, particularly GnRH analogues, will reduce operating time, improve the intra-uterine operating environment, and reduce distension medium absorption (this is the fluid used to distend the uterine cavity during surgery).
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effectiveness of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues, danazol, and progestogens, when used for endometrial thinning prior to hysteroscopic surgery for menorrhagia, in improving the intra-uterine operating environment and treatment outcome after surgery.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group search strategy (see Review Group details) was used to identify randomised trials that had compared the use of these drugs with either each other, or placebo, or no pre-operative treatment.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Trials were included if they compared the effects of these agents with each other, or with placebo or no treatment on relevant intra-operative and post-operative treatment outcomes. Only randomised studies were included in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Four studies compared goserelin (a GnRH analogue) with no treatment or placebo. Three studies compared goserelin with danazol. One study compared progestogens, danazol and triptorelin (a GnRH analogue) with no treatment. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers. A third reviewer checked data extraction for accuracy and wrote to authors where relevant data was missing or unclear. Intra-operative parameters included endometrial thickness, duration of surgery, ease of surgery, distension medium absorption and complication rate. Post-operative outcomes compared were the proportion of women with amenorrhoea, post-operative menstrual loss and dysmenorrhoea, and the need for further surgery. Data on side-effects were also recorded.
MAIN RESULTS
When compared with no treatment GnRH analogues are associated with a shorter duration of surgery, greater ease of surgery and a higher rate of post-operative amenorrhoea. Post-operative dysmenorrhoea also appears to be reduced. The use of GnRH analogues has no effect on intra-operative complication rates and patient satisfaction with this surgery is high irrespective of the use of any pre-operative endometrial thinning agent. GnRH analogues produce more consistent endometrial atrophy than danazol. For other intra-operative and post-operative outcomes any differences are minimal. Both GnRH analogues and danazol produce side-effects in a significant proportion of women, though few studies have reported these in detail. Little randomised data is available to assess the effectiveness of progestogens as endometrial thinning agents and the effect of any thinning agent
Topics: Danazol; Estrogen Antagonists; Female; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Goserelin; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Menorrhagia; Progestins
PubMed: 10796747
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001124 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2013Heavy menstrual bleeding is one of the most common reasons for referral of premenopausal women to a gynaecologist. Although medical therapy is generally first line, many... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Heavy menstrual bleeding is one of the most common reasons for referral of premenopausal women to a gynaecologist. Although medical therapy is generally first line, many women eventually will require further treatment. Endometrial ablation by hysteroscopic and more recent "second-generation" devices such as balloon, radiofrequency or microwave ablation offers a day-case surgical alternative to hysterectomy. Complete endometrial destruction is one of the main determinants of treatment success. Surgery is most effective if undertaken when endometrial thickness is less than four millimeters. One option is to perform the surgery in the immediate postmenstrual phase, which is not always practical. The other option is to use hormonal agents that induce endometrial thinning pre-operatively. The most commonly evaluated agents are goserelin (a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue, or GnRHa) and danazol. Other GnRH analogues and progestogens have also been studied, although fewer data are available. It has been suggested that these agents will reduce operating time, improve the intrauterine operating environment and reduce absorption of fluid used for intraoperative uterine cavity distension. They may also improve long-term outcomes, including menstrual loss and dysmenorrhoea.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the effectiveness and safety of pre-operative endometrial thinning agents (GnRH agonists, danazol, estrogen-progestins and progestogens) versus another agent or placebo when given before endometrial destruction in premenopausal women with heavy menstrual bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched to April 2013 for published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria: the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register of controlled trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO.Other electronic sources of trials included trial registers for ongoing and registered trials; citation indexes; conference abstracts in the Web of Knowledge; the LILACS database for trials from the Portuguese- and Spanish-speaking world; PubMed; and the OpenSIGLE database and Google for grey literature.All searches were performed in consultation with the MDSG Trials Search Co-ordinator.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they compared the effects of these agents with one other, or with placebo or no treatment, on relevant intraoperative and postoperative treatment outcomes. Selection of trials was carried out independently by two review authors.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for risk of bias and extracted data on surgical outcomes, effectiveness outcomes, proportion of women requiring further surgical therapy during follow-up, endometrial outcome measures, acceptability of use outcomes and quality of life. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Dichotomous data were combined for meta-analysis with RevMan software using the Mantel-Haenszel method to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs). Continuous data were combined for meta-analysis with RevMan software using an inverse variance method to estimate the pooled mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The overall quality of evidence for the main findings was assessed with the use of GRADE working group methods.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty studies with 1969 women were included in this review. These studies compared GnRHa, danazol and progestogens versus placebo or no treatment; GnRHa versus danazol, progestogens, GnRH antagonists or dilatation & curettage; and danazol versus progestogens. Four studies performed more than one comparison.When compared with no treatment, GnRHa used before hysteroscopic resection were associated with a higher rate of postoperative amenorrhoea at 12 months (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.0, 7 RCTs, 605 women, moderate heterogeneity; I(2) = 40%) and at 24 months (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.52, 2 RCTs, 357 women, no heterogeneity; I(2) = 0%), a slightly shorter duration of surgery (-3.5 minutes, 95% CI -4.7 to -2.3, 5 RCTs, 156 women, substantial heterogeneity; I(2) = 72%) and greater ease of surgery (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.46, 2 RCTs, 415 women, low heterogeneity; I(2) = 4%). Postoperative dysmenorrhoea was reduced (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87, 2 RCTs, 133 women, no heterogeneity; I(2) = 0%). The use of GnRHa had no effect on intraoperative complication rates (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 6.06, 5 RCTs, 592 women, no heterogeneity; I(2) = 0%), and participant satisfaction with this surgery was high irrespective of the use of pre-operative endometrial thinning agents (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05, 6 RCTs, 599 women, low heterogeneity; I(2) = 11%). GnRHa produced more consistent endometrial atrophy than was produced by danazol (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.75, 2 RCTs, 142 women, no heterogeneity; I(2) = 0%). For other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, any differences were minimal, and no benefits of GnRHa pretreatment were noted in studies in which women underwent second-generation ablation techniques. Both GnRHa and danazol produced side effects in a significant proportion of women, although few studies reported these in detail. Few randomised data were available to allow assessment of the effectiveness of progestogens as endometrial thinning agents. When reported, the long-term effects of endometrial thinning agents on benefits such as postoperative amenorrhoea were reduced with time.The main study weaknesses were that most participants received no follow-up beyond 24 months and that the studies used a small sample size. Heterogeneity for outcomes reported ranged from none to substantial. More than half the trials had no blinding of participants or outcome assessment. Most of the trials were determined to have uncertain selection and reporting bias, as they did not report allocation concealment and evidence of selective reporting was noted. The quality of reporting of adverse events was generally poor, but, when described in the studies, they included menopausal symptoms such as hot flushes, vaginal dryness, hirsutism, decreased libido and voice changes, as well as other side effects such as headache and weight gain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-quality evidence suggests that endometrial thinning with GnRHa and danazol before hysteroscopic surgery improves operating conditions and short-term postoperative outcomes. GnRHa produced slightly more consistent endometrial thinning than was produced by danazol, although both achieved satisfactory results. The effect of these agents on longer-term postoperative outcomes was reduced with time. No benefits of GnRHa pretreatment were apparent with second-generation ablation techniques. Also, side effects were more common when these agents were used.
Topics: Danazol; Dilatation and Curettage; Dysmenorrhea; Endometrium; Female; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone; Humans; Menorrhagia; Preoperative Care; Progestins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24234875
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010241.pub2 -
Revista Medica Del Instituto Mexicano... 2017Endometriosis is the presence of functional endometrial tissue in the pelvic peritoneum and it affects several age groups. That is why the impact of endometriosis in... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Endometriosis is the presence of functional endometrial tissue in the pelvic peritoneum and it affects several age groups. That is why the impact of endometriosis in quality of life is considerable. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of dienogest in patients with pelvic pain associated to endometriosis (PPAE).
METHODS
The evaluation of the effectiveness was carried out through a systematic review using the Cochrane methodology. It was used Markov model, which considers two states of health (with and without PPAE), with the possibility of weekly transition. Women between 18 and 45 years with PPAE were included, in a temporary horizon of 26 weeks. A level of statistical significance of 95% was used for a p < 0.05, with a multivariate probabilistic analysis of sensibility, as well as a univariate analysis of sensibility in several scenarios.
RESULTS
The probability that the female patient did not experience PPAE with the initial treatment was 87.91% with dienogest, 80.07% with danazol, 84.93% with medroxyprogesterone (injectable and oral) and 89.17% with gosereline. The probability that the female patient abandoned her initial treatment was 9% with dienogest, 12.07% with danazol, 9.6 and 6.75% with medroxyprogesterone injectable and oral, respectively, and 10.8 and 3.6% 3-monthly and monthly with gosereline.
CONCLUSION
Compared to danazol, medroxiprogesterone and gosereline, dienogest is the most efficient alternative to treat PPAE.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Endometriosis; Female; Hormone Antagonists; Humans; Markov Chains; Middle Aged; Multivariate Analysis; Nandrolone; Pelvic Pain; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 28591499
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Menorrhagia (heavy menstrual bleeding) is a benign yet debilitating social and health condition. The widely accepted clinical definition of menorrhagia is blood loss of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Menorrhagia (heavy menstrual bleeding) is a benign yet debilitating social and health condition. The widely accepted clinical definition of menorrhagia is blood loss of 80ml or more per period. This figure is derived from population studies that have shown that the average blood loss is between 30 and 40ml, and 90% of women have blood losses of less than 80ml. Excessive menstrual bleeding is the commonest cause of iron deficiency in the United Kingdom affecting 20-25% of the fertile female population. Menorrhagia is a common problem accounting for 12% of all gynaecological referral in the UK. Ranges of medical therapies are prescribed in order to reduce excessive menstrual blood loss, including prostaglandin synthetase inhibitors, antifibrinolytics, the oral contraceptive pill and other hormones. The combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) is claimed to have a variety of beneficial, inducing a regular shedding of a thinner endometrium and inhibiting ovulation thus having the effect of treating menorrhagia and providing contraception.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether: 1. the OCP is an effective medical therapy to reduce menorrhagia in both the short term and long term. 2. the effectiveness of combined oral contraceptive pills (OCP) compared with other medical therapies for the treatment of menorrhagia. 3. OCP is a more cost effective method than any other medical treatments of menorrhagia. 4. OCP has fewer side effects than other drugs used for menorrhagia.
SEARCH STRATEGY
All publications which describe randomised trials of OCP for the treatment of menorrhagia were obtained using the search strategy developed by the Menstrual Disorders Group.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled comparisons of OCP versus other medical therapies, placebo or no treatment for the treatment of menorrhagia. Women of reproductive years with regular heavy periods, measured either objectively or subjectively and greater than, or equal to, two months follow up.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All assessments of the quality of trials and data extraction were performed unblinded by at least two reviewers. Only one trial met the inclusion criteria and none were excluded. The included trial involved a total of 45 women.
MAIN RESULTS
As the trial used a cross-over design, only data from the first treatment period (cycles 3 and 4 ) were analysed. The results from all the three mefanamic acid groups were combined. There was no significant difference in menstrual blood loss (MBL) between those patients treated with the OCP and danazol, mefenamic acid or naproxen.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
The one small study identified [Fraser 1991] found no significant difference between groups treated with OCP, mefenamic acid, low dose danazol or naproxen. Overall, the evidence from the one study identified [Fraser 1991] is not sufficient to adequately assess the effectiveness of OCP. This review was unable to achieve its stated objectives because of the paucity of the data.
Topics: Contraceptives, Oral; Female; Humans; Menorrhagia
PubMed: 10796696
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000154 -
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Sep 2004To systematically review the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of nonestrogen treatments for menopause-associated vasomotor symptoms not due to cancer or... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of nonestrogen treatments for menopause-associated vasomotor symptoms not due to cancer or chemotherapy.
DATA SOURCES
Pertinent literature and clinical studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966-February 2004) and EMBASE (1959-February 2004) using the key search terms vasomotor symptoms, hot flashes, and menopause. Bibliographies of relevant articles were reviewed for additional references.
STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION
English-language articles reporting efficacy and safety of nonestrogen treatment modalities for perimenopausal and postmenopausal vasomotor symptoms were evaluated. All articles identified from the data sources were evaluated, and all information deemed relevant was included. Emphasis was placed on randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, as these provide the best efficacy and safety data. Studies evaluating treatment of vasomotor symptoms from other causes, such as cancer or chemotherapy, were excluded.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Prescription medications reviewed for efficacy and safety in postmenopausal vasomotor symptoms include clonidine hydrochloride, danazol, gabapentin, methyldopa, mirtazapine, progestins, propranolol hydrochloride, selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and venlafaxine. Nonprescription therapies reviewed include black cohosh, dong quai, evening primrose oil, physical activity, phytoestrogens, and red clover.
CONCLUSIONS
According to this systematic literature review, postmenopausal vasomotor treatments that have been shown to be safe and effective in short-term use include black cohosh, exercise, gabapentin, medroxyprogesterone acetate, SSRIs (ie, paroxetine hydrochloride), and soy protein. Initial, small reports are suggestive for efficacy in menopausal vasomotor symptoms with megestrol acetate and venlafaxine.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Female; Hot Flashes; Humans; Menopause; Nonprescription Drugs; Postmenopause; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasomotor System
PubMed: 15292498
DOI: 10.1345/aph.1D610