RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evolution of endometriomas with or without medical treatment. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was performed at the Gynaecological Center, Hôpital La Conception (Assistance Publique Hopitaux de Marseille). We reviewed clinical data of patients with at least one endometrioma diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and at least one other MRI exam after more than three months. Patients were divided into groups receiving medical treatment and without medical treatment (high-dose progestins, low-dose progestins or combined contraceptives). The primary objective was to evaluate the evolution of endometriomas with or without hormonal treatment. The primary evaluation criterion was the diameter of the endometriomas, and the secondary evaluation criterion was the number of endometriomas for each patient observed. The secondary objective was to evaluate whether different categories of hormonal treatment have different efficacity in the evolution of endometriomas. RESULTS: We included 68 patients, 39 (57,4%) with hormonal treatment and 29 (42,6%) without hormonal treatment. There were 105 total endometriomas identified at the first MRI, 52 in patients with hormonal treatment and 53 in patients without treatment. The mean diameter of the endometriomas in patients with hormonal treatment was 31,48 ± 18,1 mm at the first MRI and 23,60 ± 15,3 mm at the second MRI. The mean diameter of the endometriomas in patients without treatment was 33,57 ± 19,7 mm at the first MRI and 40,11 ± 25,7 mm at the second MRI (statistically significant difference, p = 0.01). The mean number of endometriomas in patients with treatment was 1,79 ± 1,1 at the first MRI and 1,18 ± 0,9 at the second MRI, while the mean number of endometriomas in patients without hormonal treatment was 1,38 ± 0,6 at the first MRI and 1,97 ± 1,5 at the second MRI (difference not statistically significant, p = 0.38). The subgroup analysis differentiated by category of hormonal treatment did not show statistically significant results. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows that there is a positive effect of hormonal treatment on reducing the diameter of endometriomas and also a significative increase in endometrioma size in the absence of treatment. There is no evidence of an advantage of a single category of hormonal treatment on this effect on endometriomas. Thus, any medical treatment could be proposed as a first-line therapy for endometriomas that would reduce the size of the endometrioma and thereby help to avoid surgical intervention.