Potential benefits of pregnancy on endometriosis symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential benefits of pregnancy on endometriosis symptoms. This is a retrospective study that has been conducted at Academic department and referral center for endometriosis. STUDY DESIGN: We included all conservative women who had a live birth after at least one surgery for endometriosis and who reported pre-pregnancy moderate to severe pelvic pain symptoms (at least one among dysmenorrhea, deep dyspareunia, non menstrual pelvic pain and dyschezia). Data were collected before pregnancy and two years after delivery. The main aim of the study was comparing endometriosis-related pain symptoms before and after pregnancy. Mental health and quality of life were also assessed to investigate the possible psychological benefits of pregnancy. RESULTS: One-hundred thirty- one women were identified. Forty- nine women (37%, 95% CI: 29-47%) had a clinically relevant recurrence of symptoms requiring medical or surgical treatment. Two years after delivery, 84% of women (95% CI 77-90%) reported at least one moderate-severe pain symptom. A statistically significant improvement was observed for HADS and SF-12 scores but not for FSFI. CONCLUSION: Women with endometriosis experiencesymptoms relief during and immediately after pregnancy. However, as for hormonal medical therapy, symptoms rapidly recur in the vast majority of cases.

Norethindrone acetate or dienogest for the treatment of symptomatic endometriosis: a before and after study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of patients satisfied with their treatment before and after a systematic change from norethindrone acetate to dienogest as the first-line progestin for symptomatic endometriosis. DESIGN: Before and after study. SETTING: Academic department. PATIENT(S): The last 90 new consecutive endometriosis patients in whom norethindrone acetate was used, and the first 90 new consecutive endometriosis patients in whom dienogest was used. INTERVENTION(S): Norethindrone acetate at the oral dose of 2.5 mg once a day until June 6, 2013, then dienogest at the oral dose of 2 mg once a day thereafter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Degree of satisfaction with treatment after 6 months of progestin therapy and assessment of any variations in pain symptoms, psychological status, sexual function, or health-related quality of life associated with the introduction of dienogest. RESULT(S): The proportion of satisfied plus very satisfied women after 6 months of treatment was 71% in the "before" period (norethindrone acetate) and 72% in the "after" period (dienogest). The implementation of dienogest was not associated with statistically significant ameliorations in overall pain relief, psychological status, sexual functioning, or health-related quality of life. Treatment was well tolerated by 58% of norethindrone acetate users compared with 80% of dienogest users. After dienogest implementation, the absolute risk reduction in the occurrence of any side effect was 13.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.8%-28.6%). CONCLUSION(S): Considering the large difference in the cost of the two drugs, dienogest should be suggested selectively in women who do not tolerate norethindrone acetate.