Excisional endometriosis surgery with hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy versus excisional endometriosis surgery alone for pelvic pain associated with deep endometriosis.
Journal
Facts, views & vision in ObGyn
ISSN: 2032-0418
Titre abrégé: Facts Views Vis Obgyn
Pays: Belgium
ID NLM: 101578773
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Mar 2023
Historique:
medline:
4
4
2023
entrez:
3
4
2023
pubmed:
4
4
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is no agreed consensus on the optimal surgical treatment for pain associated with endometriosis. To compare improvement in symptoms and quality-of-life in patients undergoing excisional endometriosis surgery (EES) versus EES with hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (EES-HBSO). This study evaluated patients undergoing EES and EES-HBSO at a single endometriosis centre between 2009 and 2019. Data was obtained from the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy database. Adenomyosis was assessed by blinded re-analysis of imaging and/or histology data. Pain scores (numeric rating scale 0-10) and quality-of-life scores (EQ-VAS) before and after EES and EES-HBSO. We included 120 patients undergoing EES and 100 patients undergoing EES-HBSO. After controlling for baseline characteristics and the presence of adenomyosis, there was greater post-op improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain amongst patients undergoing EES-HBSO compared to EES alone.The baseline pain scores had improved in the EES-HBSO cohort by 2.106/10 at 6 months (95%CI 0.469-3.742, p=0.012), 2.642/10 at 12 months (95%CI 0.871-4.413, p=0.004), and 2.548/10 at 24 months (95%CI 0.681-4.414, p=0.008), when compared to the EES group. Greater improvement amongst EES-HBSO patients was also seen for dyspareunia, non-cyclical dyschaezia and bladder pain. Patients undergoing EES-HBSO had greater improvement in EQ-VAS, although this was no longer statistically significant after controlling for adenomyosis. EES-HBSO appears to provide greater benefit than EES alone for symptoms including non-cyclical pelvic pain as well as for quality-of-life. Further research is required to determine which patients benefit the most from EES-HBSO, and whether removal of the ovaries, uterus or both is the key to this additional benefit in symptom control.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
There is no agreed consensus on the optimal surgical treatment for pain associated with endometriosis.
Objectives
UNASSIGNED
To compare improvement in symptoms and quality-of-life in patients undergoing excisional endometriosis surgery (EES) versus EES with hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (EES-HBSO).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This study evaluated patients undergoing EES and EES-HBSO at a single endometriosis centre between 2009 and 2019. Data was obtained from the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy database. Adenomyosis was assessed by blinded re-analysis of imaging and/or histology data.
Main outcome measures
UNASSIGNED
Pain scores (numeric rating scale 0-10) and quality-of-life scores (EQ-VAS) before and after EES and EES-HBSO.
Results
UNASSIGNED
We included 120 patients undergoing EES and 100 patients undergoing EES-HBSO. After controlling for baseline characteristics and the presence of adenomyosis, there was greater post-op improvement in non-cyclical pelvic pain amongst patients undergoing EES-HBSO compared to EES alone.The baseline pain scores had improved in the EES-HBSO cohort by 2.106/10 at 6 months (95%CI 0.469-3.742, p=0.012), 2.642/10 at 12 months (95%CI 0.871-4.413, p=0.004), and 2.548/10 at 24 months (95%CI 0.681-4.414, p=0.008), when compared to the EES group. Greater improvement amongst EES-HBSO patients was also seen for dyspareunia, non-cyclical dyschaezia and bladder pain. Patients undergoing EES-HBSO had greater improvement in EQ-VAS, although this was no longer statistically significant after controlling for adenomyosis.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
EES-HBSO appears to provide greater benefit than EES alone for symptoms including non-cyclical pelvic pain as well as for quality-of-life. Further research is required to determine which patients benefit the most from EES-HBSO, and whether removal of the ovaries, uterus or both is the key to this additional benefit in symptom control.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37010333
doi: 10.52054/FVVO.15.1.055
pmc: PMC10392119
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
35-43Références
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2022 Jul;29(7):884-890.e2
pubmed: 35472598
Pain. 2008 Mar;135(1-2):151-9
pubmed: 17646052
Adv Ther. 2017 Nov;34(11):2436-2451
pubmed: 29039055
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2021 Jun;100(6):1140-1147
pubmed: 33368183
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 17;1:CD004143
pubmed: 28093732
Hum Reprod Open. 2022 Feb 26;2022(2):hoac009
pubmed: 35350465
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998 Mar;60(3):271-7
pubmed: 9544712
BJOG. 2020 Dec;127(13):1628-1635
pubmed: 32437082
Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017 Oct;22(5):334-343
pubmed: 28954555
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jul;193(1):114-7
pubmed: 16021068
Hum Reprod. 2014 Mar;29(3):400-12
pubmed: 24435778
Fertil Steril. 1995 Nov;64(5):898-902
pubmed: 7589631
Fertil Steril. 2009 Dec;92(6):2113-5
pubmed: 19700151
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010 Sep-Oct;17(5):600-4
pubmed: 20656568
BJOG. 2011 Feb;118(3):292-8
pubmed: 21083863
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Jun;54(3):218-24
pubmed: 24845364
Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2019 Dec;24(6):464-474
pubmed: 31550940
BMJ Open. 2018 Apr 9;8(4):e018924
pubmed: 29632080
Climacteric. 2015;18(4):483-91
pubmed: 25845383
Fertil Steril. 2002 Feb;77(2):303-8
pubmed: 11821087
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Jan;228(1):57.e1-57.e18
pubmed: 36029832
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Sep;225(3):270.e1-270.e19
pubmed: 33894154
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jun;111(6):1285-92
pubmed: 18515510
Obstet Gynecol. 1998 May;91(5 Pt 1):673-7
pubmed: 9572209
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jun;47(6):779-83
pubmed: 26499878
Ann Med. 2001 Jul;33(5):337-43
pubmed: 11491192
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Oct;294(4):771-8
pubmed: 27168180
J Reprod Med. 2009 Jun;54(6):366-72
pubmed: 19639926
Eur Radiol. 2019 Dec;29(12):6971-6981
pubmed: 31264010
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2022 May;272:104-109
pubmed: 35299012
J Ultrasound Med. 2021 Nov;40(11):2289-2306
pubmed: 33502767
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006 Nov-Dec;13(6):566-72
pubmed: 17097580
BMJ. 2012 Oct 09;345:e6409
pubmed: 23048011
Obstet Gynecol. 2009 May;113(5):1027-1037
pubmed: 19384117
BMJ. 2021 Dec 8;375:e067528
pubmed: 34880044
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Aug;263:210-215
pubmed: 34229185