4.7 Article

Postoperative medical treatment of chronic pelvic pain related to severe endometriosis: levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 95, Issue 2, Pages 492-496

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.08.042

Keywords

LNG-IUS; GnRH-analogue; endometriosis; chronic pelvic pain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare efficacy of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS; Mirena) with depot GnRH analogue (GnRH-a; gosareline acetate; Zoladex) on endometriosis-related chronic pelvic pain (CPP) in patients with severe endometriosis during 12 months. Design: Prospective, randomized, controlled study. Setting: The reproductive endocrinology unit of a tertiary, research and education hospital. Patient(s): Forty women with severe endometriosis (revised The American Fertility Society [AFS] classification > 40) and endometriosis-related CPP and control groups were enrolled in the study. Intervention(s): The patients were treated with either LNG-IUS (n = 20) or GnRH-a (n = 20). The GnRH-a dose was repeated every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. Main Outcome Measure(s): Scores of CPP were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and total endometriosis severity profile (TESP). Result(s): The TESP score decreased in the LNG-IUS group at first, third, and sixth month follow-up visits, whereas at the 12th month follow-up visit, the TESP scores were increased to values similar to pretreatment values. Although the VAS score had no significant alteration during the follow-up period in the LNG-IUS group, the GnRH-a group showed a significant decrease in the VAS score and TESP score at the end of 1 year. The LNG-IUS treatment showed a lower patient satisfaction. Conclusion(s): Both treatment modalities showed comparable effectiveness in the treatment of CPP-related endometriosis. (Fertil Steril (R) 2011;95:492-6. (C)2011 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available