An age-related nomogram for antral follicle count: an observational study of 3821 women.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the relationship between antral follicle count (AFC) and chronological age, and what are the expected values for AFC? DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study at a specialist gynaecological ultrasound centre in London, UK. Women presenting to a gynaecology diagnostic unit for investigation of symptoms or routine check-up, and undergoing transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) examinations, between 1 January 2017 and 22 September 2022 were included in this study. RESULTS: In total, 8821 TVUS records from 7573 patients were analysed. The relationship between AFC and age was estimated to develop an AFC nomogram independent of the stage in the menstrual cycle. AFC corresponding to the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 90th centiles for each patient and age group were calculated. Both nomogram and condition-specific populations displayed a Gaussian relationship between AFC and age. For the nomogram population (scans n = 4256, patients n = 3821), a peak median AFC of 30 was observed between 21-23 years of age. The AFC distribution of the group with previous ovarian cystectomy (scans n = 534, patients n = 443) was found to be significantly different compared with the nomogram population (P < 0.0001). However, the same did not hold true for those on hormonal contraception (scans n = 566, patients n = 534) (P = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: An AFC nomogram reporting median and interquartile values for AFC by chronological age across the reproductive years was developed. This is a useful tool for providing counselling for those undergoing ovarian reserve assessments, and can be taken any time in the menstrual cycle, including in women on hormonal contraceptives or who have undergone previous ovarian cystectomy.

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: An International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counseling and planning of surgical treatment strategies. This Consensus Statement should be cited as: 'G. Condous, B. Gerges, I. Thomassin-Naggara, C. Becker, C. Tomassetti, H. Krentel, B.J. van Herendael, M. Malzoni, M. S. Abrao, E. Saridogan, J. Keckstein, G. Hudelist and Collaborators. Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: An International Consensus Statement. Eur. J. Radiol. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111450.'

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement†,‡.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on a review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counselling and planning of surgical treatment strategies.

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counseling and planning of surgical treatment strategies. © 2024 The Authors. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, by Universa Press, by The International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy, by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists and by Elsevier B.V.

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: an International Consensus Statement.

The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group, the European Endometriosis League (EEL), the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE, the International Society for Gynecologic Endoscopy (ISGE), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) elected an international, multidisciplinary panel of gynecological surgeons, sonographers, and radiologists, including a steering committee, which searched the literature for relevant articles in order to review the literature and provide evidence-based and clinically relevant statements on the use of imaging techniques for non-invasive diagnosis and classification of pelvic deep endometriosis. Preliminary statements were drafted based on review of the relevant literature. Following two rounds of revisions and voting orchestrated by chairs of the participating societies, consensus statements were finalized. A final version of the document was then resubmitted to the society chairs for approval. Twenty statements were drafted, of which 14 reached strong and three moderate agreement after the first voting round. The remaining three statements were discussed by all members of the steering committee and society chairs and rephrased, followed by an additional round of voting. At the conclusion of the process, 14 statements had strong and five statements moderate agreement, with one statement left in equipoise. This consensus work aims to guide clinicians involved in treating women with suspected endometriosis during patient assessment, counselling, and planning of surgical treatment strategies.

Horizons in Endometriosis: Proceedings of the Montreux Reproductive Summit, 14-15 July 2023.

Endometriosis is a complex and chronic gynaecological disorder that affects millions of women worldwide, leading to significant morbidity and impacting reproductive health. This condition affects up to 10% of women of reproductive age and is characterised by the presence of endometrial-like tissue outside the uterus, potentially leading to symptoms such as chronic pelvic pain, dysmenorrhoea, dyspareunia, and infertility. The Montreux summit brought a number of experts in this field together to provide a platform for discussion and exchange of ideas. These proceedings summarise the six main topics that were discussed at this summit to shed light on future directions of endometriosis classification, diagnosis, and therapeutical management. The first question addressed the possibility of preventing endometriosis in the future by identifying risk factors, genetic predispositions, and further understanding of the pathophysiology of the condition to develop targeted interventions. The clinical presentation of endometriosis is varied, and the correlation between symptoms severity and disease extent is unclear. While there is currently no universally accepted optimal classification system for endometriosis, several attempts striving towards its optimisation - each with its own advantages and limitations - were discussed. The ideal classification should be able to reconcile disease status based on the various diagnostic tools, and prognosis to guide proper patient tailored management. Regarding diagnosis, we focused on future tools and critically discussed emerging approaches aimed at reducing diagnostic delay. Preserving fertility in endometriosis patients was another debatable aspect of management that was reviewed. Moreover, besides current treatment modalities, potential novel medical therapies that can target underlying mechanisms, provide effective symptom relief, and minimise side effects in endometriotic patients were considered, including hormonal therapies, immunomodulation, and regenerative medicine. Finally, the question of hormonal substitution therapy after radical treatment for endometriosis was debated, weighing the benefits of hormone replacement.

Lessons learnt from the multi-centre LAparoscopic Versus Abdominal hysterectomy (LAVA) randomised controlled trial.

Background: The LAparoscopic Versus Abdominal hysterectomy (LAVA) randomised controlled trial comparing laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) and abdominal hysterectomy (AH) closed prematurely on the grounds of futility. Here we identify the challenges faced and lessons learnt. Objectives: To explore the views and experiences of clinical/research staff in order to understand how these might act as barriers to trial participation and recruitment. Materials and Methods: Review of the trial progress and collation of the views and experiences of clinical/ research staff on all aspects of the trial. Data were collected from transcribed conversations, email, phone, or video conferencing interactions and analysed descriptively. Main outcome measures: Site set-up milestones, recruitment rates and reasons provided by clinical/research staff for site's declining to participate. Opinions, preferences and experiences of clinicians/researchers and challenges to participation and recruitment. Results: The mean time from initial site contact to opening was 253 days and 68 days to randomise their first participant. 265 patients were screened from 13 sites over 13 months, 154 were eligible, and 75 (59%) were randomised. Of the 53 not randomised, 23 (43%) women preferred LH whilst 6 (11%) preferred AH. The main reasons given for failure to recruit or activate set-up in the 21 sites open or in set-up, were lack of research/ clinical capacity imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic and lack of clinician equipoise. Conclusions: The main reasons for the LAVA trial failure were lack of equipoise amongst surgeons and the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical/research services. What is new?: Surgeons' preference for laparoscopic hysterectomy is not shared by most patients. Many patients prefer an open hysterectomy to a laparoscopic one.

Excisional endometriosis surgery with hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy versus excisional endometriosis surgery alone for pelvic pain associated with deep endometriosis.

Background: There is no agreed consensus on the optimal surgical treatment for pain associated with endometriosis. Objectives: 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: 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: Pain scores (numeric rating scale 0-10) and quality-of-life scores (EQ-VAS) before and after EES and EES-HBSO. Results: 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: 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.

Endometrial preservation during resection of type II and type III submucosal fibroids.

Background and objectives: Hysteroscopic myomectomy is considered the gold-standard treatment of submucosal fibroids. However, it is associated with disruption of the endometrium which may lead to complications such as intrauterine adhesions and loss of functional endometrium. In this video article we describe a technique to resect Type III and Type II fibroids whilst minimising the loss of overlying endometrium. Materials and methods: We present two patients with type II/III submucosal fibroids with minimal or no intracavity component. The resection technique we demonstrate comprises either making an endometrial incision or making a small opening in the overlying endometrium to expose the fibroid pseudocapsule. Subsequent steps of resection are then performed through this small opening. Thus, complete resection is achieved without further resection of the endometrium. Main outcome measures: Evidence of endometrial healing and absence of intrauterine synechiae on follow up outpatient hysteroscopy or ultrasound scan. Results: Full resection was achieved in both patients with no or minimal loss of overlying endometrium. A follow up outpatient hysteroscopy was performed 8 weeks later in the first patient, demonstrating completely healed uterine cavity. She had a successful conception and delivery following IVF treatment for male factor infertility. The second patient is currently in the process of IVF treatment. Conclusions: Our technique enables endometrial preservation and potentially better reproductive outcomes following resection of type II and type III submucosal fibroids. Larger scale studies are required to elucidate long term outcomes on bigger patient population.

Development of a core outcome set and outcome definitions for studies on uterus-sparing treatments of adenomyosis (COSAR): an international multistakeholder-modified Delphi consensus study.

STUDY QUESTION: What outcomes should be reported in all studies investigating uterus-sparing interventions for treating uterine adenomyosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: We identified 24 specific and 26 generic core outcomes in nine domains. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research reporting adenomyosis treatment is not patient-centred and shows wide variation in outcome selection, definition, reporting and measurement of quality. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An international consensus development process was performed between March and December 2021. Participants in round one were 150 healthcare professionals, 17 researchers and 334 individuals or partners with lived experience of adenomyosis from 48 high-, middle- and low-income countries. There were 291 participants in the second round. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Stakeholders included active researchers in the field, healthcare professionals involved in diagnosis and treatment, and people and their partners with lived experience of adenomyosis. The core component of the process was a 2-step modified Delphi electronic survey. The Steering Committee analysed the results and created the final core outcome set (COS) in a semi-structured meeting. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 241 outcomes was identified and distilled into a 'long list' of 71 potential outcomes. The final COS comprises 24 specific and 26 generic core outcomes across nine domains, including pain, uterine bleeding, reproductive outcomes, haematology, urinary system, life impact, delivery of care, adverse events and reporting items, all with definitions provided by the Steering Committee. Nineteen of these outcomes will apply only to certain study types. Although not included in the COS, the Steering Committee recommended that three health economic outcomes should be recorded. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Patients from continents other than Europe were under-represented in this survey. A lack of translation of the survey might have limited the active participation of people in non-English speaking countries. Only 58% of participants returned to round two, but analysis did not indicate attrition bias. There is a significant lack of scientific evidence regarding which symptoms are caused by adenomyosis and when they are related to other co-existent disorders such as endometriosis. As future research provides more clarity, the appropriate review and revision of the COS will be necessary. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Implementing this COS in future studies on the treatment of adenomyosis will improve the quality of reporting and aid evidence synthesis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No specific funding was received for this work. T.T. received a grant (grant number 2020083) from the South Eastern Norwegian Health Authority during the course of this work. T.T. receives personal fees from General Electrics and Medtronic for lectures on ultrasound. E.R.L. is the chairman of the Norwegian Endometriosis Association. M.G.M. is a consultant for Abbvie Inc and Myovant, receives research funding from AbbVie and is Chair of the Women's Health Research Collaborative. S.-W.G. is a board member of the Asian Society of Endometriosis and Adenomyosis, on the scientific advisory board of the endometriosis foundation of America, previous congress chair for the World Endometriosis Society, for none of which he received personal fees. E.S. received outside of this work grants for two multicentre trials on endometriosis from the National Institute for Health Research UK, the Rosetrees Trust, and the Barts and the London Charity, he is a member of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), Medicines for Women's Health Expert Advisory Group, he is an ambassador for the World Endometriosis Society, and he received personal fees for lectures from Hologic, Olympus, Medtronic, Johnson & Johnson, Intuitive and Karl Storz. M.H. is member of the British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy subcommittee. No other conflict of interest was declared. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Reproductive performance following hysteroscopic treatment of intrauterine adhesions: single surgeon data.

Background: Intrauterine adhesions can negatively affect reproductive outcomes by causing infertility, miscarriage and preterm birth in women. Hysteroscopic surgery is now widely accepted as the treatment of choice in symptomatic women to restore reproductive function. Objectives: To analyse the patient characteristics and long-term reproductive outcomes of women who received treatment for intrauterine adhesions under the care of a single surgeon. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective analysis, all women who underwent hysteroscopic surgery for intrauterine adhesions under the care of the same surgeon between January 2001 and December 2019 were identified and their data were evaluated. Relevant demographic, diagnostic and reproductive outcome data was procured from patient notes. Referring doctors and patients were contacted to obtain missing information. Main outcome measures: Live birth and miscarriage rates. Results: 126 women were treated for intrauterine adhesions. Of those women who were trying to conceive, 71.4% (65/91) achieved pregnancy, 58.2% (53/91) had live births and 13.2% (12/91) had miscarriages. No statistically significant difference was found in the live birth rates when data was analysed in subgroups based on age, reason for referral/aetiology and severity of pathology. Conclusions: Hysteroscopic surgery leads to live birth in the majority of women with intrauterine adhesions. The lack of statistically significant difference in live birth rates across subgroups, including advanced age and severe pathology, suggests that surgery in all women wanting to conceive can be justified. What is new?: Hysteroscopic treatment can lead to successful outcomes even in the presence of severe adhesions and in older women with appropriate treatment.

Prevalence of deep and ovarian endometriosis in early pregnancy: ultrasound diagnostic study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence and morphological appearance of deep endometriosis and ovarian endometrioma using pelvic ultrasound examination in women attending for an early pregnancy assessment. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study set within a dedicated early pregnancy unit. The study included 1341 consecutive women who attended for an early pregnancy assessment for reassurance or because of suspected early pregnancy complications. All women underwent a transvaginal scan to assess the location and viability of their pregnancy. In addition, a detailed examination of pelvic organs was carried out to detect the presence of endometriosis and other gynecological abnormalities. Data analysis was performed using logistic regression and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: The prevalence of deep endometriosis and/or ovarian endometrioma in women attending our early pregnancy unit was 4.9% (95% CI, 3.8-6.2%). In 33/66 (50.0% (95% CI, 37.9-62.1%)) women with endometriosis, this was a new diagnosis that was made during their early pregnancy scan. On multivariable analysis, the presence of endometriosis was strongly associated with a history of subfertility (odds ratio (OR), 3.15 (95% CI, 1.63-6.07)) and presence of a congenital uterine anomaly (OR, 5.69 (95% CI, 2.17-14.9)) and uterine fibroids (OR, 2.37 (95% CI, 1.31-4.28)). Morphological changes typical of decidualization were seen in 11/33 (33.3% (95% CI, 17.2-49.4%)) women with ovarian endometrioma and 18/57 (31.6% (95% CI, 19.5-43.7%)) women with deep endometriotic nodules. CONCLUSIONS: Deep endometriosis and ovarian endometrioma were present in a significant proportion of women attending for early pregnancy assessment. The prevalence varied depending on a history of subfertility, and therefore is likely to differ significantly among populations, depending on their characteristics. Ultrasound is a useful tool for the detection of endometriosis in early pregnancy and the identification of women who may benefit from specialist antenatal care. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery for severe endometriosis in the UK: a national database study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant effect on healthcare services, particularly affecting patients who suffer from chronic conditions. However, the pandemic's effect on endometriosis surgery is not yet known. Objectives: To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery for severe endometriosis in the UK at a national, regional and centre-level. Materials and Methods: The British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE) collects data nationally on all operations for severe endometriosis which involve dissection of the pararectal space. Annual audits of this database were obtained from the BSGE. Publicly available data on COVID-19 cases and population were obtained from the UK Office for National Statistics. Main outcome measures: Numbers of annual BSGE-registered endometriosis operations. Results: A total of 8204 operations were performed. The number of operations decreased by 49.4% between 2019 and 2020 and then increased in 2021, but remained 10.5% below average pre-pandemic levels, indicating at least 980 missed operations between 2019-2020. Median operations per centre decreased by 51.0% in 2020 (IQR 29.4% - 75.0%) and increased in 2021 but remained 33% below pre-pandemic levels. There was no change in the type of surgery performed. All 11 administrative regions of Great Britain had reduced numbers of operations in 2020 compared with the average for 2017-2019, with a median 44.2% decrease (range 13.3% - 67.5%). Regional reduction in operations was correlated with COVID-19 infection rates (r=0.54, 95% CI of r 0.022 - 1.00, p=0.043). Conclusion: The number of operations performed annually in the UK for severe endometriosis fell dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic and is yet to normalise. What's new?: This study shows the dramatic effect that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on UK services for endometriosis surgery, which may continue to affect patients and clinicians for a considerable time to come.