-
Reproductive Sciences (Thousand Oaks,... Feb 2024Adenomyosis is associated with pelvic pain, abnormal uterine bleeding, and infertility. Several ultrasound-based classifications have been reported, but it is not clear... (Review)
Review
Adenomyosis is associated with pelvic pain, abnormal uterine bleeding, and infertility. Several ultrasound-based classifications have been reported, but it is not clear which criteria reflect the severity of symptoms. The aim of this review is to summarize the ultrasound features that correlate with clinical manifestations of adenomyosis and to discuss diagnostic methods for predicting disease severity. A literature search of PubMed and Google Scholar published up to March 2022 was performed. A consensus-based classification was determined primarily by defining the mapping or topography of the lesion. Ultrasound features can be classified into direct (i.e., the presence of ectopic endometrial tissue within the myometrium) and indirect findings (i.e., changes in the myometrial structure and translesional vascularity secondary to myometrial invasion). There are some reports that symptoms are positively correlated with the location and spread of the disease. Indeed, the lesion thickness, diffuse or internal adenomyosis, and focal adenomyosis may be associated with increased risks of dysmenorrhea, abnormal uterine bleeding, and infertility, respectively. Two ultrasound markers (i.e., the presence of heterogeneous myometrium and myometrial cysts) appear to be the criteria most clinicians focus on. However, decision-making on treatment necessity is determined by symptom severity rather than the topography of the lesions. There is currently no consensus that symptom severity can be predicted based on ultrasound features, but the ultrasound-based criteria may be helpful in diagnosing adenomyosis.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adenomyosis; Uterine Diseases; Ultrasonography; Myometrium; Infertility; Uterine Hemorrhage
PubMed: 37584856
DOI: 10.1007/s43032-023-01318-5 -
Nutrition & Dietetics: the Journal of... Feb 2024This systematic literature review with meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids on prostaglandin levels and pain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This systematic literature review with meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids on prostaglandin levels and pain severity in women with dysmenorrhoea and identify adverse side effects.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted in Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE complete, CINAHL and AMED databases (PROSPERO CRD42022340371). Included studies provided omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids compared to a control in women with dysmenorrhoea and reported pain and/or prostaglandin levels. A random effects meta-analysis with Cohen's d effect size (95% confidence interval) was performed in SPPS for studies that reported pain outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Quality Criteria Checklist.
RESULTS
Twelve studies (n = 881 dysmenorrhoeal women) of predominantly neutral quality (83%) were included that provided daily supplementation of 300-1800 mg omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids over 2 or 3 months. Meta-analysis (n = 8 studies) showed a large effect of omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (d = -1.020, 95% confidence interval -1.53 to -0.51) at reducing dysmenorrhoea pain. No studies measured prostaglandin levels, 86% of studies measuring analgesic use showed a reduction with omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and few studies reported mild adverse side effects in individual participants.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings suggest that daily supplementation of 300-1800 mg omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids over 2-3 months are generally well tolerated and reduces pain and analgesic use in women with dysmenorrhoea. However, the neutral quality of research is limited by methodological issues and the mechanism of action remains to be determined.
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Fatty Acids, Omega-3; Analgesics; Prostaglandins
PubMed: 37545015
DOI: 10.1111/1747-0080.12835 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2023Dysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common and a major cause of pain in women. Combined oral contraceptives (OCPs) are often used in the management of primary... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dysmenorrhoea (painful menstrual cramps) is common and a major cause of pain in women. Combined oral contraceptives (OCPs) are often used in the management of primary dysmenorrhoea, but there is a need for reporting the benefits and harms. Primary dysmenorrhoea is defined as painful menstrual cramps without pelvic pathology.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of combined oral contraceptive pills for the management of primary dysmenorrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date 28 March 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing all combined OCPs with other combined OCPs, placebo, or management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Participants had to have primary dysmenorrhoea, diagnosed by ruling out pelvic pathology through pelvic examination or ultrasound.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were pain score after treatment, improvement in pain, and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 RCTs (3723 women). Eleven RCTs compared combined OCP with placebo, eight compared different dosages of combined OCP, one compared two OCP regimens with placebo, and one compared OCP with NSAIDs. OCP versus placebo or no treatment OCPs reduce pain in women with dysmenorrhoea more effectively than placebo. Six studies reported treatment effects on different scales; the result can be interpreted as a moderate reduction in pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.74 to -0.41; I² = 28%; 6 RCTs, 588 women; high-quality evidence). Six studies also reported pain improvement as a dichotomous outcome (risk ratio (RR) 1.65, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.10; I² = 69%; 6 RCTs, 717 women; low-quality evidence). The data suggest that in women with a 28% chance of improvement in pain with placebo or no treatment, the improvement in women using combined OCP will be between 37% and 60%. Compared to placebo or no treatment, OCPs probably increase the risk of any adverse events (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.43; I² = 79%; 7 RCTs, 1025 women; moderate-quality evidence), and may also increase the risk of serious adverse events (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.49 to 6.43; I² = 22%; 4 RCTs, 512 women; low-quality evidence). Women who received OCPs had an increased risk of irregular bleeding compared to women who received placebo or no treatment (RR 2.63, 95% CI 2.11 to 3.28; I² = 29%; 7 RCTs, 1025 women; high-quality evidence). In women with a risk of irregular bleeding of 18% if using placebo or no treatment, the risk would be between 39% and 60% if using combined OCP. OCPs probably increase the risk of headaches (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.04; I² = 44%; 5 RCTs, 656 women; moderate-quality evidence), and nausea (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.30; I² = 39%; 8 RCTs, 948 women; moderate-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of OCP on weight gain (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.45; 1 RCT, 76 women; low-quality evidence). OCPs may slightly reduce requirements for additional medication (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.98; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 163 women; low-quality evidence), and absence from work (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 148 women; low-quality evidence). One OCP versus another OCP Continuous use of OCPs (no pause or inactive tablets after the usual 21 days of hormone pills) may reduce pain in women with dysmenorrhoea more effectively than the standard regimen (SMD -0.73, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.34; 2 RCTs, 106 women; low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine if there was a difference in pain improvement between ethinylestradiol 20 μg and ethinylestradiol 30 μg OCPs (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.74; 1 RCT, 326 women; moderate-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference between third- and fourth-generation and first- and second-generation OCPs (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; 1 RCT, 178 women; moderate-quality evidence). The standard regimen of OCPs may slightly increase the risk of any adverse events over the continuous regimen (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.22; I² = 76%; 3 RCTs, 602 women; low-quality evidence), and probably increases the risk of irregular bleeding (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.69; 2 RCTs, 379 women; moderate-quality evidence). Due to lack of studies, it is uncertain if there is a difference between continuous and standard regimen OCPs in serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.24; 1 RCT, 212 women), headaches (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.76; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, 435 women), or nausea (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.30; I² = 23%; 2 RCTs, 435 women) (all very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if one type of OCP reduces absence from work more than the other (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.99; 1 RCT, 445 women; very low-quality evidence). OCPs versus NSAIDs There were insufficient data to determine whether OCPs were more effective than NSAIDs for pain (mean difference -0.30, 95% CI -5.43 to 4.83; 1 RCT, 91 women; low-quality evidence). The study did not report on adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
OCPs are effective for treating dysmenorrhoea, but they cause irregular bleeding, and probably headache and nausea. Long-term effects were not covered in this review. Continuous use of OCPs was probably more effective than the standard regimen but safety should be ensured with long-term data. Due to lack of data, we are uncertain whether NSAIDs are better than OCPs for treating dysmenorrhoea.
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Contraceptives, Oral, Combined; Muscle Cramp; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Headache
PubMed: 37523477
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002120.pub4 -
Complementary Therapies in Medicine Sep 2023This study aimed to examine the effect of acupuncture on symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with endometriosis.
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to examine the effect of acupuncture on symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with endometriosis.
METHODS
Nine biomedical databases were searched to April 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials of acupuncture and/or moxibustion used alone or as adjunct to guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy for the treatment of endometriosis. One reviewer extracted data and another verified the data. A random effects model was used to calculate mean differences.
RESULTS
Fifteen trials involving 1018 patients met the inclusion criteria, but diversity in comparisons and outcome measures prevented meta-analysis. Compared to sham acupuncture, manual acupuncture was more effective at reducing dysmenorrhea VAS pain score (mean difference [MD] - 2.40, 95 % CI [- 2.80, - 2.00]; moderate certainty evidence), pelvic pain VAS score (MD - 2.65, 95 % CI [- 3.40, - 1.90]; high certainty evidence) and dyspareunia VAS scores (MD - 2.88, [- 3.83, - 1.93]), lessened the size of ovarian cyst (MD - 3.88, 95 % CI [- 7.06, - 0.70]), and improved quality of life. Compared to conventional therapy, manual acupuncture plus conventional therapy and warm needle alone resulted in greater improvements in quality of life than conventional therapy. Among the six studies that reported safety, fewer adverse events were reported in participants who received acupuncture or moxibustion.
CONCLUSIONS
Low to moderate certainty evidence from single studies showed that manual acupuncture may improve pain-related symptoms and quality of life; however, there is insufficient evidence on the overall effectiveness of acupuncture and moxibustion for endometriosis.
Topics: Female; Humans; Moxibustion; Quality of Life; Endometriosis; Acupuncture Therapy; Dysmenorrhea
PubMed: 37453585
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2023.102963 -
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 -
Obstetrics and Gynecology Sep 2023The diagnosis of endometriosis, a common gynecologic condition, is characterized by delays of up to 11 years. During this time, women may experience persistent symptoms...
OBJECTIVE
The diagnosis of endometriosis, a common gynecologic condition, is characterized by delays of up to 11 years. During this time, women may experience persistent symptoms that affect their quality of life, productivity, and relationships, and the disease may progress. It is therefore a priority to understand the factors that contribute to this delay to help improve the diagnostic pathway. Our objective was to describe the diagnosis barriers of endometriosis from the patient and health care professional perspectives using a qualitative evidence synthesis.
DATA SOURCES
We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature using combinations of the synonyms of endometriosis, diagnosis, and qualitative research. The search was restricted to English-language articles from database creation until May 2022.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION
The initial search yielded 899 articles. Studies were included if they explored the experiences or views of affected women or health care professionals on the diagnosis of endometriosis and used qualitative methods for data collection and data analysis. Risk of bias was assessed with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS
Thirty-seven articles were considered for full review, with 13 eligible articles identified for inclusion. Thematic synthesis was used to identify four key themes: 1) individual factors (n=6), 2) interpersonal influences (n=6), 3) health system factors (n=13), and 4) factors specific to endometriosis (n=13). These encompassed 12 subthemes that represented barriers to the diagnosis of endometriosis: 1) difficulty establishing pathologic symptoms from normal menstruation and the use of self-care techniques; 2) menstrual stigma and the normalization of menstrual pain; 3) attitudes and lack of training for health care professionals, delayed referrals to specialist services, and poor explanation of oral contraceptive pill use in the diagnostic process; and 4) variability in presenting symptoms, overlap with other conditions, lack of a noninvasive method of diagnosis, and concerns about the value of a diagnosis.
CONCLUSION
This review identified barriers to the timely diagnosis of endometriosis from the perspective of affected individuals and health care professionals. It highlights areas for improvement along the diagnostic pathway, which may guide future strategies to reduce delays.
Topics: Humans; Female; Endometriosis; Quality of Life; Menstruation; Dysmenorrhea; Health Personnel
PubMed: 37441792
DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005255 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Oct 2023Menstrual cycle (MC) disorders and MC-related symptoms can have debilitating effects on the health and performance of female athletes. As the participation of women in...
BACKGROUND
Menstrual cycle (MC) disorders and MC-related symptoms can have debilitating effects on the health and performance of female athletes. As the participation of women in sports continues to increase, understanding the prevalence of a range of MC disorders and MC-related symptoms may guide preventive strategies to protect the health and optimise the performance of female athletes.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the prevalence of MC disorders and MC-related symptoms among female athletes who are not using hormonal contraceptives and evaluate the assessment methods used to identify MC disorders and MC-related symptoms.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Six databases were searched until September 2022 for all original research that reported the prevalence of MC disorders and/or MC-related symptoms in athletes not using hormonal contraceptives, which included the definitions of the MC disorders examined, and the assessment methods used. MC disorders included amenorrhoea, anovulation, dysmenorrhoea, heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), luteal phase deficiency (LPD), oligomenorrhoea, premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). MC-related symptoms included any affective and physical symptoms related to the MC that do not cause significant personal, interpersonal or functional impairment. The prevalence data across eligible studies were combined, and all studies were qualitatively synthesised to evaluate the assessment methods and tools used to identify MC disorders and MC-related symptoms. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using a modified Downs and Black checklist.
RESULTS
Sixty studies involving 6380 athletes were included. A wide range of prevalence was observed for all types of MC disorders, with a dearth of data on anovulation and LPD. Based on pooled data, dysmenorrhoea (32.3%; range 7.8-85.6%) was the most prevalent MC disorder. Studies reporting MC-related symptoms mostly examined the premenstrual and menstruation phases, where affective symptoms appeared more prevalent than physical symptoms. A larger proportion of athletes reported symptoms during the initial days of menstruation compared with the premenstrual phase. MC disorders and MC-related symptoms were retrospectively assessed using self-report methods in 90.0% of studies. Most studies (76.7%) in this review were graded as moderate quality.
DISCUSSION
MC disorders and MC-related symptoms are commonplace among female athletes, warranting further research examining their impact on performance and preventive/management strategies to optimise athlete health. To increase the quality of future studies, researchers should adopt standardised definitions of MC disorders and assessment methods such as a combination of calendar counting, urinary ovulation tests and a mid-luteal phase serum progesterone measurement when assessing menstrual function. Similarly, standardised diagnostic criteria should be used when examining MC disorders such as HMB, PMS and PMDD. Practically, implementing prospective cycle monitoring that includes ovulation testing, mid-luteal blood sampling (where feasible) and symptom logging throughout the MC could support athletes and practitioners to promptly identify and manage MC disorders and/or MC-related symptoms.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This review has been registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021268757).
Topics: Female; Humans; Dysmenorrhea; Prevalence; Prospective Studies; Anovulation; Retrospective Studies; Menstrual Cycle; Premenstrual Syndrome; Menstruation Disturbances; Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder; Athletes; Contraceptive Agents
PubMed: 37389782
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-023-01871-8 -
Journal of Integrative and... Nov 2023The currently available evidence is unclear in regard to pain-related outcomes of patients with chronic pain conditions who undergo treatment with anthroposophic... (Review)
Review
The currently available evidence is unclear in regard to pain-related outcomes of patients with chronic pain conditions who undergo treatment with anthroposophic medicine (AM). To identify and synthesize the evidence in patients with chronic pain before and after AM therapy. The following databases and search interfaces were searched on October 21, 2021: Embase (via Embase.com), Medline (via PubMed), and the Cochrane Library. Additional references were identified via bibliographies of included studies. In at least one experimental arm that used anthroposophic therapy to treat chronic pain, AM treatments were required to be documented. Included studies reported on pain severity and physical and emotional functioning. Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion criteria, extracted the data, and conducted the quality evaluation of the included studies based on the critical appraisal tools provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Seven studies (eight publications) were included in the review, of which were three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two non-RCTs, and two pretest-post-test studies. A total number of 600 patients participated in the identified experimental studies, of whom all were adults. Three studies included patients with low back pain, one study each assessed patients with fibromyalgia, migraine, dysmenorrhea, and postpolio syndrome, respectively. The identified clinical studies reported considerable reductions in symptoms and effect sizes of pain outcomes after AM therapies being predominantly large, with no notable adverse effects. The findings of this systematic review of studies assessing AM therapies in patients with chronic pain problems revealed that there is a scarcity of evidence currently available, with unclear effects of AM treatments in reducing pain intensity and improving quality of life in the evaluated health conditions. Although most of the studies revealed a favorable benefit on one or more pain-related outcomes, the variability of the research did not allow for generalization across different studies, health conditions, and populations.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Chronic Pain; Fibromyalgia; Pain Management; Emotions; Pain Measurement
PubMed: 37358805
DOI: 10.1089/jicm.2022.0723 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition affecting 6 to 11% of reproductive-age women and may cause dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea, and infertility. One treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endometriosis is a common gynaecological condition affecting 6 to 11% of reproductive-age women and may cause dyspareunia, dysmenorrhoea, and infertility. One treatment strategy is medical therapy with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHas) to reduce pain due to endometriosis. One of the adverse effects of GnRHas is a decreased bone mineral density. In addition to assessing the effect on pain, quality of life, most troublesome symptom and patients' satisfaction, the current review also evaluated the effect on bone mineral density and risk of adverse effects in women with endometriosis who use GnRHas versus other treatment options.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of GnRH analogues (GnRHas) in the treatment of painful symptoms associated with endometriosis and to determine the effects of GnRHas on bone mineral density of women with endometriosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the trial registries in May 2022 together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared GnRHas with other hormonal treatment options, including analgesics, danazol, intra-uterine progestogens, oral or injectable progestogens, gestrinone and also GnRHas compared with no treatment or placebo. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with add-back therapy (hormonal or non-hormonal) or calcium-regulation agents were also included in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodology as recommended by Cochrane. Primary outcomes are relief of overall pain and the objective measurement of bone mineral density. Secondary outcomes include adverse effects, quality of life, improvement in the most troublesome symptoms and patient satisfaction. Due to high risk of bias associated with some of the studies, primary analyses of all review outcomes were restricted to studies at low risk of selection bias. Sensitivity analysis including all studies was then performed.
MAIN RESULTS
Seventy-two studies involving 7355 patients were included. The evidence was very low to low quality: the main limitations of all studies were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of study methods, and serious imprecision. Trials comparing GnRHas versus no treatment We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus placebo There may be a decrease in overall pain, reported as pelvic pain scores (RR 2.14; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.24, 1 RCT, n = 87, low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea scores (RR 2.25; 95% CI 1.59 to 3.16, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia scores (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.39 to 3.54, 1 RCT, n = 59, low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness scores (RR 2.28; 95% CI 1.48 to 3.50, 1 RCT, n = 85, low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. We are uncertain of the effect for pelvic induration, based on the results found after three months of treatment (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.79, 1 RCT, n = 81, low-certainty evidence). Besides, treatment with GnRHas may be associated with a greater incidence of hot flushes at three months of treatment (RR 3.08; 95% CI 1.89 to 5.01, 1 RCT, n = 100, low-certainty evidence). Trials comparing GnRHas versus danazol For overall pain, for women treated with either GnRHas or danazol, a subdivision was made between pelvic tenderness, partly resolved and completely resolved. We are uncertain about the effect on relief of overall pain, when a subdivision was made for overall pain (MD -0.30; 95% CI -1.66 to 1.06, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic pain (MD 0.20; 95% CI -0.26 to 0.66, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dysmenorrhoea (MD 0.10; 95% CI -0.49 to 0.69, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), dyspareunia (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.77 to 0.37, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), pelvic induration (MD -0.10; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.39, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), and pelvic tenderness (MD -0.20; 95% CI -0.78 to 0.38, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) after three months of treatment. For pelvic pain (MD 0.50; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.90, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and pelvic induration (MD 0.70; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.19, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence), the complaints may decrease slightly after treatment with GnRHas, compared to danazol, for six months of treatment. Trials comparing GnRHas versus analgesics We did not identify any studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus intra-uterine progestogens We did not identify any low risk of bias studies. Trials comparing GnRHas versus GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents There may be a slight decrease in bone mineral density (BMD) after 12 months treatment with GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents for anterior-posterior spine (MD -7.00; 95% CI -7.53 to -6.47, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence) and lateral spine (MD -12.40; 95% CI -13.31 to -11.49, 1 RCT, n = 41, very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For relief of overall pain, there may be a slight decrease in favour of treatment with GnRHas compared to placebo or oral or injectable progestogens. We are uncertain about the effect when comparing GnRHas with danazol, intra-uterine progestogens or gestrinone. For BMD, there may be a slight decrease when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to gestrinone. There was a bigger decrease of BMD in favour of GnRHas, compared to GnRHas in conjunction with calcium-regulating agents. However, there may be a slight increase in adverse effects when women are treated with GnRHas, compared to placebo or gestrinone. Due to a very low to low certainty of the evidence, a wide range of outcome measures and a wide range of outcome measurement instruments, the results should be interpreted with caution.
Topics: Female; Humans; Endometriosis; Danazol; Progestins; Gestrinone; Dysmenorrhea; Calcium; Dyspareunia; Pelvic Pain; Calcium, Dietary; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
PubMed: 37341141
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014788.pub2 -
Journal of Pain Research 2023Dysmenorrhea is a common clinical condition and some studies shown that the skin temperature of some acupoints changes in primary dysmenorrhea (PD) patients. This study... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Dysmenorrhea is a common clinical condition and some studies shown that the skin temperature of some acupoints changes in primary dysmenorrhea (PD) patients. This study aimed to evaluate the changes in skin temperature at specific acupoints in PD patients and healthy subjects.
METHODS
The literature for assessing skin temperature at acupoints in PD patients and healthy subjects was searched in eight databases. The literatures obtained from the search was independently screened by two authors, and the quality of the included articles was evaluated using the consensus checklist of the Thermographic Imaging in Sports and Exercise Medicine (TISEM) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scale. The skin temperature of the relevant acupoints or the difference between the left and right acupoints of the same name was used as the outcome during any period of menstruation. Finally, the meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software to evaluate the changes in skin temperature in the related acupoints.
RESULTS
Seven eligible studies were included, which included 328 patients with PD and 279 healthy subjects. The results of the meta-analysis revealed a significant difference in skin temperature around the Sanyinjiao (SP6)(MD: 0.04, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.08), Xuehai (SP 10)(MD: -0.07, 95% CI:-0.11, -0.02) and Taixi (KI 3)(MD: 0.06, 95% CI:0.01, 0.11) acupoints between PD and healthy subjects. PD patients also showed a difference in skin temperature at the Taixi (KI 3)(MD: 0.14, 95% CI:0.04, 0.24), Shuiquan (KI 5)(MD: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.03,0.19), Taichong (LR 3)(MD: -0.10, 95% CI: -0.19,-0.01), Diji (SP 8)(MD: -0.09, 95% CI: -0.16, -0.01), and Xuehai (SP 10)(MD: -0.14, 95% CI: -0.23, -0.06) acupoint areas at different times of menstruation compared to that of healthy subjects, as revealed by the subgroup analysis.
CONCLUSION
Primary dysmenorrhea patients showed some differences in the skin temperature of the special acupoints are as Sanyinjiao (SP6), Diji (SP 8), Xuehai (SP 10), Shuiquan (KI 5), Taichong (LR 3), and Taixi (KI 3) compared with healthy subjects.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022381387.
PubMed: 37337608
DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S411923