-
The Journal of the American Osteopathic... Jul 2020Dysmenorrhea, or painful menstruation, is a common cause of acute pelvic pain that affects approximately two-thirds of women who are postmenarchal in the United States....
Dysmenorrhea, or painful menstruation, is a common cause of acute pelvic pain that affects approximately two-thirds of women who are postmenarchal in the United States. Dysmenorrhea pain is frequently severe enough to disrupt daily activities and often accompanied by other symptoms, such as diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, headache, and dizziness. Primary dysmenorrhea is likely due to an excess of prostaglandins and is traditionally treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and hormonal therapy. Secondary dysmenorrhea can have multiple origins and requires targeted therapy. Currently, musculoskeletal dysfunction and psychosocial factors are not listed as causes of secondary dysmenorrhea. The authors present a case in which the cause of secondary dysmenorrhea was thought to be related to both musculoskeletal dysfunction and emotional stress. Osteopathic manipulative treatment and lifestyle changes helped resolve secondary dysmenorrhea.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Manipulation, Osteopathic
PubMed: 32598462
DOI: 10.7556/jaoa.2020.076 -
JBRA Assisted Reproduction Jan 2019Primary dysmenorrhea is a painful uterine contraction caused by endometrial laceration. Drug therapies and complementary medicine have been used to treat dysmenorrhea....
OBJECTIVES
Primary dysmenorrhea is a painful uterine contraction caused by endometrial laceration. Drug therapies and complementary medicine have been used to treat dysmenorrhea. The aim of this study was to investigate and offer an updated perspective on the treatments for dysmenorrhea.
METHODS
The present study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The required information was collected based on searches for the following keywords: treatment, primary dysmenorrhea, medicinal plants, chemical drugs, and herbs. Searches were performed on databases Pubmed, Web of Sciences, Scopus, Iran medex, and SID by March 2018 to find literature in the English and Persian languages on this subject without a time limit.
RESULTS
This review included 17 papers, 10 of which on complementary medicine, three on drug therapies, and four on acupuncture and acupressure. The largest and smallest samples had 303 and 24 patients, respectively. Length of treatment ranged from one to six months and the measures most commonly used in the studies were the visual analogue scale and clinical efficacy. Reported complications included gastrointestinal events, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and liver and kidney disorders.
CONCLUSION
Medicinal plants, drugs, and acupressure seem to suppress pain by reducing the level of prostaglandins, mediating nitric oxide, increasing beta-endorphin levels, blocking the calcium channel, and enhancing circulatory flow through the uterine pathway. Further trials are required to confirm the benefits of the procedures described and ensure the absence of complications.
Topics: Acupressure; Acupuncture Therapy; Complementary Therapies; Drug Therapy; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Gynecology; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30521155
DOI: 10.5935/1518-0557.20180083 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Dysmenorrhoea refers to painful menstrual cramps and is a common gynaecological complaint. Conventional treatments include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dysmenorrhoea refers to painful menstrual cramps and is a common gynaecological complaint. Conventional treatments include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), which both reduce myometrial activity (contractions of the uterus). A suggested alternative approach is dietary supplements. We used the term 'dietary supplement' to include herbs or other botanical, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and amino acids. We excluded traditional Chinese medicines.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of dietary supplements for treating dysmenorrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched sources including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO (all from inception to 23 March 2015), trial registries, and the reference lists of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of dietary supplements for moderate or severe primary or secondary dysmenorrhoea. We excluded studies of women with an intrauterine device. Eligible comparators were other dietary supplements, placebo, no treatment, or conventional analgesia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection, performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias in the included trials. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and adverse effects. We used a fixed-effect model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous data, and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We presented data that were unsuitable for analysis either descriptively or in additional tables. We assessed the quality of the evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 RCTs (3101 women). Most included studies were conducted amongst cohorts of students with primary dysmenorrhoea in their late teens or early twenties. Twenty-two studies were conducted in Iran and the rest were performed in other middle-income countries. Only one study addressed secondary dysmenorrhoea. Interventions included 12 different herbal medicines (German chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla, M recutita, Chamomilla recutita), cinnamon (Cinnamomum zeylanicum, C. verum), Damask rose (Rosa damascena), dill (Anethum graveolens), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum), ginger (Zingiber officinale), guava (Psidium guajava), rhubarb (Rheum emodi), uzara (Xysmalobium undulatum), valerian (Valeriana officinalis), and zataria (Zataria multiflora)) and five non-herbal supplements (fish oil, melatonin, vitamins B1 and E, and zinc sulphate) in a variety of formulations and doses. Comparators included other supplements, placebo, no treatment, and NSAIDs.We judged all the evidence to be of low or very low quality. The main limitations were imprecision due to very small sample sizes, failure to report study methods, and inconsistency. For most comparisons there was only one included study, and very few studies reported adverse effects. Effectiveness of supplements for primary dysmenorrhoea We have presented pain scores (all on a visual analogue scale (VAS) 0 to 10 point scale) or rates of pain relief, or both, at the first post-treatment follow-up. Supplements versus placebo or no treatmentThere was no evidence of effectiveness for vitamin E (MD 0.00 points, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.34; two RCTs, 135 women).There was no consistent evidence of effectiveness for dill (MD -1.15 points, 95% CI -2.22 to -0.08, one RCT, 46 women), guava (MD 0.59, 95% CI -0.13 to 1.31; one RCT, 151 women); one RCT, 73 women), or fennel (MD -0.34 points, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.06; one RCT, 43 women).There was very limited evidence of effectiveness for fenugreek (MD -1.71 points, 95% CI -2.35 to -1.07; one RCT, 101 women), fish oil (MD 1.11 points, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.77; one RCT, 120 women), fish oil plus vitamin B1 (MD -1.21 points, 95% CI -1.79 to -0.63; one RCT, 120 women), ginger (MD -1.55 points, 95% CI -2.43 to -0.68; three RCTs, 266 women; OR 5.44, 95% CI 1.80 to 16.46; one RCT, 69 women), valerian (MD -0.76 points, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.08; one RCT, 100 women), vitamin B1 alone (MD -2.70 points, 95% CI -3.32 to -2.08; one RCT, 120 women), zataria (OR 6.66, 95% CI 2.66 to 16.72; one RCT, 99 women), and zinc sulphate (MD -0.95 points, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.36; one RCT, 99 women).Data on chamomile and cinnamon versus placebo were unsuitable for analysis. Supplements versus NSAIDSThere was no evidence of any difference between NSAIDs and dill (MD 0.13 points, 95% CI -1.01 to 1.27; one RCT, 47 women), fennel (MD -0.70 points, 95% CI -1.81 to 0.41; one RCT, 59 women), guava (MD 1.19, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.96; one RCT, 155 women), rhubarb (MD -0.20 points, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.04; one RCT, 45 women), or valerian (MD points 0.62 , 95% CI 0.03 to 1.21; one RCT, 99 women),There was no consistent evidence of a difference between Damask rose and NSAIDs (MD -0.15 points, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.25; one RCT, 92 women).There was very limited evidence that chamomile was more effective than NSAIDs (MD -1.42 points, 95% CI -1.69 to -1.15; one RCT, 160 women). Supplements versus other supplementsThere was no evidence of a difference in effectiveness between ginger and zinc sulphate (MD 0.02 points, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.62; one RCT, 101 women). Vitamin B1 may be more effective than fish oil (MD -1.59 points, 95% CI -2.25 to -0.93; one RCT, 120 women). Effectiveness of supplements for secondary dysmenorrhoea There was no strong evidence of benefit for melatonin compared to placebo for dysmenorrhoea secondary to endometriosis (data were unsuitable for analysis). Safety of supplements Only four of the 27 included studies reported adverse effects in both treatment groups. There was no evidence of a difference between the groups but data were too scanty to reach any conclusions about safety.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no high quality evidence to support the effectiveness of any dietary supplement for dysmenorrhoea, and evidence of safety is lacking. However for several supplements there was some low quality evidence of effectiveness and more research is justified.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Dietary Supplements; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Magnesium; Phytotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thiamine; Vitamin B 6; Vitamin E
PubMed: 27000311
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002124.pub2 -
Fertility and Sterility May 2023To evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture in the treatment of endometriosis-associated pain.
DESIGN
A multicenter, randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
INSTITUTIONS
Four tertiary hospitals in Jiangxi and Hainan Provinces.
SUBJECTS
Women with endometriosis-associated pain aged between 20 and 40 years.
INTERVENTION
Subjects were assigned randomly to receive either acupuncture or sham acupuncture treatment for 12 weeks, starting one week before each expected menstruation and administered as a 30-minute session once per day, 3 times a week. During the menstruation period, acupuncture was administered daily when pelvic pain associated with endometriosis occurred. After acupuncture or sham acupuncture treatment, the subjects were followed for another 12 weeks.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Changes in maximum pain as assessed with the visual analog scale (VAS) for various pelvic pain, duration of dysmenorrhea, and scores on the Multidimensional Pain Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, Profile of Mood States, and Endometriosis Health Profile from baseline to week 12 and week 24.
RESULTS
A total of 106 women were assigned randomly to the acupuncture and sham groups. In the acupuncture group, the reduction in the dysmenorrhea VAS score was significantly greater after treatment, but not at the end of the trial, compared to the sham group. The duration of pain was significantly shorter in the acupuncture group. All test scores were improved to a significantly greater extent in the acupuncture group than in the sham group at week 12 but not at week 24. Changes in nonmenstrual pelvic pain and dyspareunia VAS scores were not different between the groups. No severe adverse events or differences in adverse events were recorded.
CONCLUSION
Acupuncture is an effective and safe method of relieving dysmenorrhea, shortening the pain duration, and improving wellbeing and quality of life in women with endometriosis-associated pain, although its efficacy fades after treatment is discontinued.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT03125304.
Topics: Female; Humans; Young Adult; Adult; Endometriosis; Dysmenorrhea; Quality of Life; Single-Blind Method; Pelvic Pain; Acupuncture Therapy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36716811
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.01.034 -
International Journal of Environmental... Dec 2022This study aimed to identify factors associated with the prevalence and severity of menstrual-related symptoms. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021208432).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to identify factors associated with the prevalence and severity of menstrual-related symptoms. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021208432). We conducted literature searches of PubMed and Ichushi-Web and used the Jonna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist to assess the quality. Of the 77 studies included in the meta-analysis, significant odds ratios (ORs) were obtained for eight factors associated with primary dysmenorrhea (PD): age ≥ 20 years (OR: 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04−1.34), body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m2 (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.01−2.26), longer menstrual periods (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.04−0.28), irregular menstrual cycle (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.13−1.45), family history of PD (OR: 3.80; 95% CI: 2.18−6.61), stress (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.30−2.72), sleeping hours < 7 h (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.04−1.35), and bedtime after 23:01 (OR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.16−1.45). Two factors were associated with severity of PD (moderate vs. severe): BMI < 18.5 kg/m2 (OR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.01−3.54) and smoking (OR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.08−3.47). PD severity (mild vs. severe) and prevalence of premenstrual syndrome were associated with BMI < 18.5 kg/m2 (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.04−3.50) and smoking (OR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.31−2.66), respectively. The identified risk factors could be utilized to construct an appropriate strategy to improve menstrual symptoms and support women’s health.
Topics: Female; Humans; Young Adult; Adult; Dysmenorrhea; Prevalence; Menstruation Disturbances; Premenstrual Syndrome; Menstruation
PubMed: 36612891
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010569 -
Revista Colombiana de Obstetricia Y... Dec 2021To report a case of Herlyn-Werner-Wunderlich syndrome (HWWS) and conduct a review of the literature to determine clinical and imaging findings in these patients. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To report a case of Herlyn-Werner-Wunderlich syndrome (HWWS) and conduct a review of the literature to determine clinical and imaging findings in these patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A 16-year-old female patient who presented to a military hospital in Bogotá complaining of recurrent pelvic pain, receiving a final diagnosis of HWWS. A systematic search was conducted in the different databases of systematic reviews, cohort studies, case series and case reports of patients of any age diagnosed with HWWS. Clinical presentation characteristics and the most frequent diagnostic technologies used were obtained. A narrative summary of the findings is presented.
RESULTS
Overall, 77 publications with a total of 676 patients were included. The most frequent symptom was dysmenorrhea (63.9%), followed by pelvic pain (35.2%). The most frequently used diagnostic technologies were pelvic ultrasound in 92.1% of cases and nuclear magnetic resonance in 74.6%. Hysteroscopy and laparoscopy are seldom used for diagnosing this condition.
CONCLUSION
HWWS is an infrequent disease condition. It must be part of the work-up for renal agenesis in pediatric patients and of the differential diagnosis in primary dysmenorrhea in adolescence. The role of hysteroscopy in this condition must be further assessed in larger cohort studies.
Topics: Abnormalities, Multiple; Adolescent; Child; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Syndrome; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Urogenital Abnormalities; Uterus; Vagina
PubMed: 35134287
DOI: 10.18597/rcog.3699 -
Value in Health : the Journal of the... Oct 2022Primary dysmenorrhea (PD), as the most common complaint among students, is also one of the public problems worldwide. Prevalence and risk factors of PD were variant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Primary dysmenorrhea (PD), as the most common complaint among students, is also one of the public problems worldwide. Prevalence and risk factors of PD were variant between studies; as the main population, no meta-analysis for PD has hitherto been conducted in students.
METHODS
We searched the published literature in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG, and VIP database. After screening and assessing the quality of studies, data from eligible studies were extracted for meta-analysis via the R language.
RESULTS
A total of 96 studies published from 1991 to 2021 with 78 068 students were included, the mean age of participants was 19.4, and 79.9% were university students. The pooled overall prevalence of PD was 66.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 63.4-68.9), and 31.1% (CI 28.1-34.3), 25.7% (CI 23.4-28.0), and 8.3% of students (CI 7.4-9.3) reported mild, moderate, and severe PD, respectively. Besides, the prevalence of PD was estimated at 58.8% (CI 54.3-63.7) before 2010, but ascended to 68.5% (CI 65.5-71.6) after 2010 and rose to 71.5% (CI 65.8-76.6) in 2015 to 2021. About risk factors for PD, underweight, skipping breakfast, poor sleep quality, staying up late, lack of physical exercise, exposure to cold and eating cold or spicy foods during menstruation, dietary bias, prefer snacks, family history of dysmenorrhea, irregular menstrual cycle, heavy stress, negative emotion during menstruation, and anxiety were significantly related to PD.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall prevalence of PD among students was 66.1% and had a rising tendency in the last 10 years. Our findings helped understand the current prevalence and improve the administration of PD among students.
Topics: Dysmenorrhea; Exercise; Female; Humans; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Students
PubMed: 35523614
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.023 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Exercise has a number of health benefits and has been recommended as a treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea (period pain), but the evidence for its effectiveness on...
BACKGROUND
Exercise has a number of health benefits and has been recommended as a treatment for primary dysmenorrhoea (period pain), but the evidence for its effectiveness on primary dysmenorrhoea is unclear. This review examined the available evidence supporting the use of exercise to treat primary dysmenorrhoea.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of exercise for women with primary dysmenorrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED and CINAHL (from inception to July 2019). We searched two clinical trial databases (inception to March 2019) and handsearched reference lists and previous systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies if they randomised women with moderate-to-severe primary dysmenorrhoea to receive exercise versus no treatment, attention control, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or the oral contraceptive pill. Cross-over studies and cluster-randomised trials were not eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected the studies, assessed eligible studies for risk of bias, and extracted data from each study. We contacted study authors for missing information. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcomes were menstrual pain intensity and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included overall menstrual symptoms, usage of rescue analgesic medication, restriction of daily life activities, absence from work or school and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 12 trials with 854 women in the review, with 10 trials and 754 women in the meta-analysis. Nine of the 10 studies compared exercise with no treatment, and one study compared exercise with NSAIDs. No studies compared exercise with attention control or with the oral contraceptive pill. Studies used low-intensity exercise (stretching, core strengthening or yoga) or high-intensity exercise (Zumba or aerobic training); none of the included studies used resistance training.Exercise versus no treatmentExercise may have a large effect on reducing menstrual pain intensity compared to no exercise (standard mean difference (SMD) -1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.06 to -1.66; 9 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), n = 632; I= 91%; low-quality evidence). This SMD corresponds to a 25 mm reduction on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and is likely to be clinically significant. We are uncertain if there is any difference in adverse event rates between exercise and no treatment.We are uncertain if exercise reduces overall menstrual symptoms (as measured by the Moos Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MMDQ)), such as back pain or fatigue compared to no treatment (mean difference (MD) -33.16, 95% CI -40.45 to -25.87; 1 RCT, n = 120; very low-quality evidence), or improves mental quality of life (MD 4.40, 95% CI 1.59 to 7.21; 1 RCT, n = 55; very low-quality evidence) or physical quality of life (as measured by the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12)) compared to no exercise (MD 3.40, 95% CI -1.68 to 8.48; 1 RCT, n = 55; very low-quality evidence) when compared to no treatment. No studies reported on any changes in restriction of daily life activities or on absence from work or school.Exercise versus NSAIDsWe are uncertain if exercise, when compared with mefenamic acid, reduced menstrual pain intensity (MD -7.40, 95% CI -8.36 to -6.44; 1 RCT, n = 122; very low-quality evidence), use of rescue analgesic medication (risk ratio (RR) 1.77, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.60; 1 RCT, n = 122; very low-quality evidence) or absence from work or school (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.03; 1 RCT, n = 122; very low-quality evidence). None of the included studies reported on adverse events, overall menstrual symptoms, restriction of daily life activities or quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The current low-quality evidence suggests that exercise, performed for about 45 to 60 minutes each time, three times per week or more, regardless of intensity, may provide a clinically significant reduction in menstrual pain intensity of around 25 mm on a 100 mm VAS. All studies used exercise regularly throughout the month, with some studies asking women not to exercise during menstruation. Given the overall health benefits of exercise, and the relatively low risk of side effects reported in the general population, women may consider using exercise, either alone or in conjunction with other modalities, such as NSAIDs, to manage menstrual pain. It is unclear if the benefits of exercise persist after regular exercise has stopped or if they are similar in women over the age of 25. Further research is required, using validated outcome measures, adequate blinding and suitable comparator groups reflecting current best practice or accounting for the extra attention given during exercise.
Topics: Dysmenorrhea; Exercise; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Menstruation; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31538328
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004142.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2015Dysmenorrhoea is a common gynaecological problem consisting of painful cramps accompanying menstruation, which in the absence of any underlying abnormality is known as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dysmenorrhoea is a common gynaecological problem consisting of painful cramps accompanying menstruation, which in the absence of any underlying abnormality is known as primary dysmenorrhoea. Research has shown that women with dysmenorrhoea have high levels of prostaglandins, hormones known to cause cramping abdominal pain. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are drugs that act by blocking prostaglandin production. They inhibit the action of cyclooxygenase (COX), an enzyme responsible for the formation of prostaglandins. The COX enzyme exists in two forms, COX-1 and COX-2. Traditional NSAIDs are considered 'non-selective' because they inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2 enzymes. More selective NSAIDs that solely target COX-2 enzymes (COX-2-specific inhibitors) were launched in 1999 with the aim of reducing side effects commonly reported in association with NSAIDs, such as indigestion, headaches and drowsiness.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of NSAIDs in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases in January 2015: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, November 2014 issue), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science. We also searched clinical trials registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP). We checked the abstracts of major scientific meetings and the reference lists of relevant articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparisons of NSAIDs versus placebo, other NSAIDs or paracetamol, when used to treat primary dysmenorrhoea.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected the studies, assessed their risk of bias and extracted data, calculating odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used inverse variance methods to combine data. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 80 randomised controlled trials (5820 women). They compared 20 different NSAIDs (18 non-selective and two COX-2-specific) versus placebo, paracetamol or each other. NSAIDs versus placeboAmong women with primary dysmenorrhoea, NSAIDs were more effective for pain relief than placebo (OR 4.37, 95% CI 3.76 to 5.09; 35 RCTs, I(2) = 53%, low quality evidence). This suggests that if 18% of women taking placebo achieve moderate or excellent pain relief, between 45% and 53% taking NSAIDs will do so.However, NSAIDs were associated with more adverse effects (overall adverse effects: OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.51, 25 RCTs, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence; gastrointestinal adverse effects: OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.23, 14 RCTs, I(2) = 30%; neurological adverse effects: OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.66 to 4.53, seven RCTs, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence). The evidence suggests that if 10% of women taking placebo experience side effects, between 11% and 14% of women taking NSAIDs will do so. NSAIDs versus other NSAIDsWhen NSAIDs were compared with each other there was little evidence of the superiority of any individual NSAID for either pain relief or safety. However, the available evidence had little power to detect such differences, as most individual comparisons were based on very few small trials. Non-selective NSAIDs versus COX-2-specific selectorsOnly two of the included studies utilised COX-2-specific inhibitors (etoricoxib and celecoxib). There was no evidence that COX-2-specific inhibitors were more effective or tolerable for the treatment of dysmenorrhoea than traditional NSAIDs; however data were very scanty. NSAIDs versus paracetamolNSAIDs appeared to be more effective for pain relief than paracetamol (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.43, three RCTs, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference with regard to adverse effects, though data were very scanty.Most of the studies were commercially funded (59%); a further 31% failed to state their source of funding.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
NSAIDs appear to be a very effective treatment for dysmenorrhoea, though women using them need to be aware of the substantial risk of adverse effects. There is insufficient evidence to determine which (if any) individual NSAID is the safest and most effective for the treatment of dysmenorrhoea. We rated the quality of the evidence as low for most comparisons, mainly due to poor reporting of study methods.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26224322
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001751.pub3 -
Progres En Urologie : Journal de... Jul 2022This randomized, crossover, double-blind, controlled trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of a preprogrammed transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
INTRODUCTION
This randomized, crossover, double-blind, controlled trial evaluates the efficacy and safety of a preprogrammed transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device versus placebo (SHAM) in women with primary dysmenorrhea (PD).
MATERIAL
Forty women suffering from significant dysmenorrhea requiring the use of analgesics and/or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs self-apply to the abdominal or lumbar region depending on the location of the pain, alternately according to randomization, the TENS device then the SHAM (dummy device) or conversely SHAM then TENS. The primary endpoint compares the evolution of pain intensity before and after application of TENS and SHAM. The speed of action, the persistence of the analgesic effect and the therapeutic savings are also evaluated. Adverse events (AEs) are collected.
RESULTS
A statistically and clinically significant decrease in the pain of 53% (P<0.0001) is observed during the first 2 applications of TENS versus no analgesic effect (-5%, P=0.318) with SHAM. Over all 197 applications of TENS, the reduction of menstrual pain intensity by more than half is confirmed. The rapid relief, less than 20 minutes in 74% of cases, lasts on average more than 7 hours. A difference in analgesic consumption of -93% is observed in favor of TENS (P<0.01). Seven participants reported 10 non-serious AEs, 2 of which were possibly related to TENS.
CONCLUSION
The TENS device tested represents a well-tolerated, rapidly and lastingly effective non-pharmacological analgesic solution, capable of replacing or being combined with analgesics in the management of PD.
Topics: Analgesics; Double-Blind Method; Dysmenorrhea; Female; Humans; Pain Measurement; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35249825
DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2022.01.005