The effect of surgery or medication on pain and quality of life in women with endometrioma. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

For patients with endometrioma it is unclear what treatment: surgery and/or medication, is more effective in reducing pain and improving quality of life (QoL). This systematic review and meta- analysis aimed to provide an overview of the existing evidence on the effects of surgery and/or medication (i.e. analgesics and/or hormonal medication) on pain and QoL. A search through CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase was conducted. The study population had to be women treated for endometrioma. Retrospective or prospective studies reporting about QoL and/or the following types of pain were reviewed: dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and pain that was not well defined in the included article (referred to as pain). We performed a meta-analysis on mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and proportions of patients experiencing different types of pain over time. QoL was described narratively. Out of 11.515 articles, 76 studies including 7148 patients were included for the systematic review. The meta-analysis consisted of 52 studies including 4556 patients. No studies compared medication with surgery. And there were no studies on analgesics. Meta-analysis showed that surgery and/or medication often reduced VAS scores and proportions of all types of pain over time. Surgery and medication combined seems more effective in reducing VAS scores of pain compared to surgery alone, but not to medication alone (estimated mean difference = 0.17, p < 0.0001 and -0.98, p = 0.0339). QoL improved after medication (follow up ≤ 12 months) and QoL was unchanged or worsened after surgery and medication combined (follow up ≤ 24 months). However, these were results from a total of 5 studies. Both surgery and medication reduce endometriosis-related pain in patients with endometrioma. However, there is lack of uniform, good quality data comparing surgery with medication to draw firm conclusions. For better-informed treatment decisions, further studies including a standardized core-outcome set at fixed follow-up times, are necessary.

Pre-eclampsia in pregnancies resulting from oocyte donation, natural conception or IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the prevalence of pre-eclampsia (PE) in pregnancies after oocyte donation (OD) compared to natural conception (NC) and to IVF with autologous oocytes (AO)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Overall the prevalence of PE after OD was 4-5 times higher than after NC and 2-3 times higher than after IVF with AO. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The indication for OD is expanding to lesbian women requesting shared lesbian motherhood. Previous reviews have shown that the risk of PE is higher in pregnancies after OD than after NC and after IVF with AO. Classification on the severity of PE is lacking as is the relationship with known risk factors such as maternal age and multiple gestations. Furthermore the actual prevalence of PE in pregnancies resulting from OD is not known. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. A literature search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL, OpenGrey and Greynet from January 1980 through July 2020. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included retrospective and prospective cohort studies. The study population consisted of pregnancies after OD and NC or IVF and data had to be available about prevalence of PE. We compared the risk of (severe) PE in OD versus NC and IVF pregnancies, subgrouped by plurality and maternal age. We calculated individual and pooled odds ratios (OR) and prevalence estimates with 95% CI using a random effect model, while heterogeneity was assessed by the I2. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In total, 27 studies comprising of 7089 OD pregnancies, 1 139 540 NC pregnancies and 72 742 IVF pregnancies were available for analysis. The risks of PE and severe PE was increased in OD pregnancies compared to NC pregnancies (pooled OR of all subgroups: 5.09, 95% CI: 4.29-6.04; I2 = 19% and OR: 7.42, 95% CI: 4.64-11.88; I2 = 49%, respectively). This suggests that compared to a PE risk of 2.9% with NC, the risk with OD was between 11.5% and 15.4%. Compared to a severe PE risk of 0.5% with NC, the risk with OD was between 2.3% and 5.6%. The pooled adjusted OR for PE was 3.24 (95% 2.74-3.83) for OD versus NC pregnancies. The risks of PE and severe PE were also increased in OD pregnancies compared to IVF pregnancies (pooled OR of all subgroups: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.49-3.53; I2 = 51% and OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.15-4.11; I2 = 0%, respectively). This suggests that compared to a PE risk of 5.9% with IVF, the risk with OD was between 13.5% and 18.0%. Compared to a severe PE risk of 3.3% with IVF, the risk with OD was between 6.8% and 12.2%. The pooled adjusted OR for PE was 2.67 (95% 2.28-3.13) for OD versus IVF. The pooled prevalence of PE in singleton pregnancies after OD was 10.7% (95% CI 6.6-15.5) compared to 2.0% (95% CI 1.0-3.1) after NC and 4.1% (95% CI 2.7-5.6) after IVF. The prevalence in multiple pregnancies was 27.8% (95% CI 23.6-32.2) after OD, 7.5% (95% CI 7.2-7.8) after NC and 9.7% (95% CI 6.2-13.9) after IVF. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The precise definition of PE is still a matter of debate. The different criteria could have affected the prevalence estimate. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Nearly one in six women will suffer PE after OD. Although it is uncertain whether these risks are consistent for lesbian couples undergoing shared motherhood, we feel that women who can conceive naturally could be advised to reconsider. In women with primary ovarian insufficiency, we feel that factors that may increase risk of PE ever further, such as double embryo transfer, should be avoided whenever possible. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding or competing interests. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020166899.