Outcomes After Surgery at an Interdisciplinary Centre of Expertise for Endometriosis and Pelvic Pain in Canada: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate pain-related quality-of-life (Endometriosis Health Profile-30 [EHP-30] pain subscale) after surgery at an interdisciplinary centre of expertise for endometriosis and pelvic pain. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was completed of persons undergoing surgical management for pelvic pain between December 2013 and July 2016 at an interdisciplinary tertiary referral centre for pelvic pain and endometriosis. We compared the change in EHP-30 scores for the following scenarios: (1) type of surgery (conservative surgery vs. hysterectomy), (2) stage of endometriosis (stage I/II vs. III/IV), and (3) age (age <40 vs. age ≥40 years). We used mixed-effects models to evaluate changes in pain during follow-up after surgery. RESULTS: Overall, 595 individuals met our inclusion criteria; the follow-up rate was 65.9% (392/595). In total, 436 (73.3%) underwent conservative surgery, while 159 (26.7%) underwent hysterectomy. Improvements in pain-related quality-of-life were seen for both conservative surgery and hysterectomy but greater improvements were seen with hysterectomy (P < 0.001). For conservative surgery, similar improvements in quality-of-life were observed regardless of endometriosis stage (I/II vs. III/IV) (P = 0.84) or age (<40 or ≥40 years old) (P = 0.87). We also observed similar improvements in quality-of-life regardless of stage (P = 0.24) or age (P = 0.71) after hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: At an interdisciplinary centre of expertise, there were significant improvements in quality-of-life after endometriosis surgery. These improvements were seen for both conservative surgery and hysterectomy (although greater improvement with the latter), for early and advanced stage disease, and younger and older patients.

World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonization Project: V. Physical examination standards in endometriosis research.

OBJECTIVE: The World Endometriosis Research Foundation established the Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonisation Project (EPHect) to create standardized documentation tools (with common data elements) to facilitate the comparison and combination of data across different research sites and studies. In 2014, 4 data research standards were published: clinician-reported surgical data, patient-reported clinical data, and fluid and tissue biospecimen collection. Our current objective is to create an EPHect standard for the clinician-reported physical examination (EPHect-PE) for research studies. DESIGN: An international consortium involving 26 clinical and academic experts and patient partners from 11 countries representing 25 institutions and organizations. Two virtual workshops, followed by the development of the physical examination standards underwent multiple rounds of iterations and revisions. SUBJECTS: N/A MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): N/A RESULT(S): The EPHect-PE tool provides standardized assessment of physical examination characteristics and pain phenotyping. Data elements involve examination of back and pelvic girdle; abdomen including allodynia and trigger points; vulva including provoked vestibulodynia; pelvic floor muscle tone and tenderness; tenderness on unidigital pelvic examination; presence of pelvic nodularity; uterine size and mobility; presence of adnexal masses; presence of incisional masses; speculum examination; tenderness and allodynia at an extra-pelvic site (e.g., forearm); and recording of anthropometrics. CONCLUSION(S): The EPHect-PE standards will facilitate the standardized documentation of the physical examination, including the assessment and documentation of examination phenotyping of endometriosis-associated pelvic pain.

Guideline No. 449: Diagnosis and Impact of Endometriosis - A Canadian Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a contemporary approach to the understanding of the impact and methods for the diagnosis of endometriosis in Canada. TARGET POPULATION: Individuals, families, communities, health care providers, and health care administrators who are affected by, care for patients with, or manage delivery of services for endometriosis. OPTIONS: The diagnosis of endometriosis is facilitated by a detailed history, examination, and imaging tests with providers who are experienced in endometriosis care. Surgical evaluation with pathology confirms a diagnosis of endometriosis; however, it is not required for those whose diagnosis was confirmed with imaging. OUTCOMES: There is a need to address earlier recognition of endometriosis to facilitate timely access to care and support. Education directed at the public, affected individuals and families, health care providers, and health care administrators are essential to reduce delays in diagnosis and treatment. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Increased awareness and education about the impact and approach to diagnosis may support timely access to care for patients and families affected by endometriosis. Earlier and appropriate care may support a reduced health care system burden; however, improved clinical evaluation may require initial investments. EVIDENCE: Each section was reviewed with a unique search strategy representative of the evidence available in the literature related to the area of focus. The literature searches for each section of this guideline are listed in Appendix A and include information from published systematic reviews described in the text. VALIDATION METHODS: The recommendations were developed following two rounds of review by a national expert panel through an iterative 2-year consensus process. Further details on the process are shared in Appendix B. The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See Appendix C (Table C1 for definitions and Table C2 for interpretations of strong and conditional recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: This guideline is intended to support health care providers and policymakers involved in the care of those impacted by endometriosis and the systems required to support them. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Endometriosis impact and diagnosis updated guidelines for Canadian health care providers and policymakers. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Guideline No. 445: Management of Chronic Pelvic Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for the management of chronic pelvic pain in females. TARGET POPULATION: This guideline is specific to pelvic pain in adolescent and adult females and excluded literature that looked at pelvic pain in males. It also did not address genital pain. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: The intent is to benefit patients with chronic pelvic pain by providing an evidence-based approach to management. Access to certain interventions such as physiotherapy and psychological treatments, and to interdisciplinary care overall, may be limited by costs and service availability. EVIDENCE: Medline and the Cochrane Database from 1990 to 2020 were searched for articles in English on subjects related to chronic pelvic pain, including diagnosis, overlapping pain conditions, central sensitization, management, medications, surgery, physiotherapy, psychological therapies, alternative and complementary therapies, and multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary care. The committee reviewed the literature and available data and used a consensus approach to develop recommendations. Only articles in English and pertaining to female subjects were included. VALIDATION METHODS: The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations). INTENDED AUDIENCE: Family physicians, gynaecologists, urologists, pain specialists, physiotherapists, and mental health professionals. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Management of chronic pelvic pain should consider multifactorial contributors, including underlying central sensitization/nociplastic pain, and employ an interdisciplinary biopsychosocial approach that includes pain education, physiotherapy, and psychological & medical treatments. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Mental Health Outcomes of Endometriosis Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impact of Pre-pandemic Central Nervous System Sensitization.

To correlate pain-related phenotyping for central nervous system sensitization in endometriosis-associated pain with mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic, the prospective Endometriosis and Pelvic Pain Interdisciplinary Cohort (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02911090) was linked to the COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Study of a Provincial Population-Based Cohort for Gender and Sex (RESPPONSE) dataset. The primary outcomes were depression (PHQ-9) and anxiety (GAD-7) scores during the pandemic. The explanatory variables of interest were the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) score (0-100) and endometriosis-associated chronic pain comorbidities/psychological variables before the pandemic. The explanatory and response variables were assessed for correlation, followed by multivariable regression analyses adjusting for PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores pre-pandemic as well as age, body mass index, and parity. A higher CSI score and a greater number of chronic pain comorbidities before the pandemic were both positively correlated with PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores during the pandemic. These associations remained significant in adjusted analyses. Increasing the CSI score by 10 was associated with an increase in pandemic PHQ-9 by .74 points (P < .0001) and GAD-7 by .73 points (P < .0001) on average. Each additional chronic pain comorbidity/psychological variable was associated with an increase in pandemic PHQ-9 by an average of .63 points (P = .0004) and GAD-7 by .53 points (P = .0002). Endometriosis patients with a history of central sensitization before the pandemic had worse mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a risk factor for mental health symptoms in the face of major stressors, clinical proxies for central sensitization can be used to identify endometriosis patients who may need additional support. PERSPECTIVE: This article adds to the growing literature of the clinical importance of central sensitization in endometriosis patients, who had more symptoms of depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical features of central sensitization may help clinicians identify endometriosis patients needing additional support when facing major stressors.

Safety and Efficiency Outcomes of Ambulatory Gynaecologic Procedures in Canadian Surgical Centres Adopting a Common Model.

OBJECTIVE: The present study aims to compare the safety and efficiency outcomes of ambulatory gynaecologic procedures performed under conscious sedation and/or local anaesthetic at 2 Canadian institutions. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was completed over 1-year on patients presenting to the ambulatory care centres at 2 Canadian institutions that shared a common care model. Outcomes of interest were lead time (registration to discharge), procedural time, and intraoperative complications. Surgical data was derived from a retrospective chart review and outcomes were compared using the independent t test and one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: A total of 1495 and 1098 patients presented to the 2 sites. The average age of patients was 35.5 ± 12.3 years and 41.7 ± 10.2 years. The most commonly performed procedures were dilatation and curettages at the first centre and operative hysteroscopies at the second centre. Average lead times were similar: 170.3 ± 35.8 minutes and 171.6 ± 45.4 minutes (P = 0.45). There was a significant difference in mean procedural time being 9.8 ± 5.5 minutes and 17.0 ± 10.0 minutes (P < 0.001). The rate of minor intraoperative complications was 3.8% and 6.6% (P = 0.002); whereas the rate of major complications was 2.7% and 3.3% (P = 0.43). CONCLUSION: In Canada, the majority of gynaecologic procedures are performed under general anesthesia. By comparing outcomes at 2 separate Canadian centres, we demonstrated the reproducibility of a common ambulatory model for minor gynaecologic procedures, supporting the implementation of similar care models across Canada.

Acceptability, reliability, and validity of a vaginal insert for the self-assessment of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately half of people with endometriosis experience deep dyspareunia; however, there is no means of objective self-testing of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability, test-retest reliability, and validity of a vaginal insert for a self-assessment of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia. METHODS: Participants were recruited from a tertiary endometriosis center. Inclusion criteria were: 19 to 49 years of age, self-reported deep dyspareunia of ≥4 of 10, and surgically confirmed endometriosis. Participants completed 2 self-assessments using the vaginal insert to self-assess tenderness at the right and left pelvic floor, bladder, cervix-uterus, and posterior cul-de-sac (vaginal fornix). The participants recorded tenderness at each pelvic site and completed a questionnaire regarding the acceptability of the vaginal insert to assess deep dyspareunia. Test-retest reliability was assessed by correlating the tenderness scores between the 2 assessment dates. Over a 4-week period, the participants also recorded deep dyspareunia severity at each penetrative vaginal sex encounter. Validity was assessed by correlating vaginal insert tenderness to deep dyspareunia severity, and also to tenderness reported on a prior gynecologic pelvic examination. OUTCOMES: The main outcome measures were the acceptability index score, tenderness (0-10) at each pelvic site, and prospective deep dyspareunia scores (0-10) over 4 weeks. RESULTS: There were 19 participants (mean age 34 ± 7 years) who completed the study. The majority identified as female (94.7%), heterosexual (89.5%), and white (89.5%). The median acceptability index score was 0.72 (interquartile range, 0.66-0.81). For test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.79 (P = .001) for the left pelvic floor, 0.82 (P < .001) for the right pelvic floor, 0.54 (P = .07) for the bladder, 0.89 (P < .001) for the cervix-uterus, and 0.77 (P = .003) for the cul-de-sac. The correlation between the highest self-assessed mean tenderness in each participant and self-reported deep dyspareunia over 4 weeks was r = 0.32, but correlations for each pelvic site varied significantly. Tenderness at each site on prior gynecologist pelvic exam was associated with higher self-assessed mean tenderness with the vaginal insert in each participant (effect sizes = 0.42-0.88). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The vaginal insert is acceptable and reliable for the objective self-assessment of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia, with initial evidence of validity. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: A strength was the inclusion of participants who were avoiding sexual activity and a limitation was the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Future studies with larger sample sizes are required to further establish the validity of the vaginal insert for the self-assessment of endometriosis-associated deep dyspareunia.

Pelvic pain comorbidities associated with quality of life after endometriosis surgery.

BACKGROUND: After endometriosis surgery, pain can persist or recur in a subset of patients. A possible reason for persistent pain after surgery is central nervous system sensitization and associated pelvic pain comorbidities. Surgery addresses the peripheral component of endometriosis pain pathophysiology (by lesion removal) but may not treat this centralized pain. Therefore, endometriosis patients with pelvic pain comorbidities related to central sensitization may experience worse pain-related outcomes after surgery, such as lower pain-related quality of life. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether baseline (preoperative) pelvic pain comorbidities are associated with pain-related quality of life at follow-up after endometriosis surgery. STUDY DESIGN: This study used longitudinal prospective registry data from the Endometriosis Pelvic Pain Interdisciplinary Cohort at the BC Women's Centre for Pelvic Pain and Endometriosis. Participants were aged ≤50 years with confirmed or clinically suspected endometriosis, and underwent surgery (fertility-sparing or hysterectomy) for endometriosis pain. Participants completed the pain subscale of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 quality of life questionnaire preoperatively and at follow-up (1-2 years). Linear regression was performed to measure the individual relationships between 7 pelvic pain comorbidities at baseline and follow-up Endometriosis Health Profile-30 score, controlling for baseline Endometriosis Health Profile-30 and type of surgery received. These baseline (preoperative) pelvic pain comorbidities included abdominal wall pain, pelvic floor myalgia, painful bladder syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, Patient Health Questionnaire 9 depression score, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 score, and Pain Catastrophizing Scale score. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression was then performed to select the most important variables associated with follow-up Endometriosis Health Profile-30 from 17 covariates (including the 7 pelvic pain comorbidities, baseline Endometriosis Health Profile-30 score, type of surgery, and other endometriosis-related factors such as stage and histologic confirmation of endometriosis). Using 1000 bootstrap samples, we estimated the coefficients and confidence intervals of the selected variables and generated a covariate importance rank. RESULTS: The study included 444 participants. The median follow-up time was 18 months. Pain-related quality of life (Endometriosis Health Profile-30) of the study population significantly improved at follow-up after surgery (P<.001). The following pelvic pain comorbidities were associated with lower quality of life (higher Endometriosis Health Profile-30 score) after surgery, controlling for baseline Endometriosis Health Profile-30 score and type of surgery (fertility-sparing vs hysterectomy): abdominal wall pain (P=.013), pelvic floor myalgia (P=.036), painful bladder syndrome (P=.022), Patient Health Questionnaire 9 score (P<.001), Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 score (P<.001), and Pain Catastrophizing Scale score (P=.007). Irritable bowel syndrome was not significant (P=.70). Of the 17 covariates included for least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression, 6 remained in the final model (lambda=3.136). These included 3 pelvic pain comorbidities that were associated with higher follow-up Endometriosis Health Profile-30 scores or worse quality of life: abdominal wall pain (ß=3.19), pelvic floor myalgia (ß=2.44), and Patient Health Questionnaire 9 depression score (ß=0.49). The other 3 variables in the final model were baseline Endometriosis Health Profile-30 score, type of surgery, and histologic confirmation of endometriosis. CONCLUSION: Pelvic pain comorbidities present at baseline before surgery, which may reflect underlying central nervous system sensitization, are associated with lower pain-related quality of life after endometriosis surgery. Particularly important were depression and musculoskeletal/myofascial pain (abdominal wall pain and pelvic floor myalgia). Therefore, these pelvic pain comorbidities should be candidates for a formal prediction model of pain outcomes after endometriosis surgery.

Disease Burden of Dysmenorrhea: Impact on Life Course Potential.

Dysmenorrhea is the most common gynecologic condition among the female population and has a significant impact on life course potential. It has a widespread impact on a female's mental and physical well-being, with longstanding impairments on quality of life, personal relationships, and education and career attainment. Furthermore, untreated dysmenorrhea can lead to hyperalgesic priming, which predisposes to chronic pelvic pain. Primary dysmenorrhea is pain in the lower abdomen that occurs before or during menses and in the absence of pelvic pathology. One possible mechanism is endometrial inflammation and increased prostaglandin release, resulting in painful uterine contractions. Dysmenorrhea may also occur secondary to pelvic pathology, such as endometriosis, adenomyosis or due to cyclic exacerbation of non-gynecologic pain conditions. A thorough patient evaluation is essential to differentiate between potential causes and guide management. Treatment must be tailored to individual patient symptoms. Pharmacologic management with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and/or combined hormonal contraceptives is most common. Heat therapy, exercise, vitamins and dietary supplements have limited evidence and can be offered for patients seeking non-pharmacologic adjunctive or alternative options. Greater awareness for both health-care providers and patients allows for early intervention to reduce impact on quality of life and life course potential.

KRAS mutations and endometriosis burden of disease.

The clinical phenotype of somatic mutations in endometriosis is unknown. The objective was to determine whether somatic KRAS mutations were associated with greater disease burden in endometriosis (i.e. more severe subtypes and higher stage). This prospective longitudinal cohort study included 122 subjects undergoing endometriosis surgery at a tertiary referral center between 2013 and 2017, with 5-9 years of follow-up. Somatic activating KRAS codon 12 mutations were detected in endometriosis lesions using droplet digital PCR. KRAS mutation status for each subject was coded as present (KRAS mutation in at least one endometriosis sample in a subject) or absent. Standardized clinical phenotyping for each subject was carried out via linkage to a prospective registry. Primary outcome was anatomic disease burden, based on distribution of subtypes (deep infiltrating endometriosis, ovarian endometrioma, and superficial peritoneal endometriosis) and surgical staging (Stages I-IV). Secondary outcomes were markers of surgical difficulty, demographics, pain scores, and risk of re-operation. KRAS mutation presence was higher in subjects with deep infiltrating endometriosis or endometrioma lesions only (57.9%; 11/19) and subjects with mixed subtypes (60.6%; 40/66), compared with those with superficial endometriosis only (35.1%; 13/37) (p = 0.04). KRAS mutation was present in 27.6% (8/29) of Stage I cases, in comparison to 65.0% (13/20) of Stage II, 63.0% (17/27) of Stage III, and 58.1% (25/43) of Stage IV cases (p = 0.02). KRAS mutation was also associated with greater surgical difficulty (ureterolysis) (relative risk [RR] = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.02-2.11) and non-Caucasian ethnicity (RR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.89). Pain severities did not differ based on KRAS mutation status, at either baseline or follow-up. Re-operation rates were low overall, occurring in 17.2% with KRAS mutation compared with 10.3% without (RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 0.66-4.21). In conclusion, KRAS mutations were associated with greater anatomic severity of endometriosis, resulting in increased surgical difficulty. Somatic cancer-driver mutations may inform a future molecular classification of endometriosis.

Web-Based Digital Storytelling for Endometriosis and Pain: Qualitative Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is a complex chronic disease characterized by pain, including painful sex, that can contribute to considerable sexual function, self-esteem, and relationship challenges. Digital storytelling is an arts-based, participatory methodology wherein individuals create and share their illness experiences in detailing their lived experiences. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to pilot-test a web-based digital storytelling workshop focused on endometriosis to understand storytellers' experiences of workshop participation. We assessed the feasibility of story cocreation and sharing, including the emotional impact of workshop participation, the acceptability of the workshop for the subject matter, and the storytellers' willingness to share their stories with broader audiences as a method for knowledge translation. METHODS: This study used a community-based participatory methodology supplemented with patient-oriented research and integrated knowledge translation. Study participants, referred to as storytellers, cocreated 3- to 5-minute individual digital stories about their lived experiences of endometriosis during a web-based workshop (comprising five 2-hour sessions over 6 weeks) facilitated by The Center for Digital Storytelling. Data were collected through participant observations at the workshop, storyteller weekly reflective journals, and an end-of-workshop focus group interview with storytellers. These data were analyzed using a qualitative interpretive description approach. RESULTS: A total of 5 women and 1 nonbinary storyteller aged 19 to 39 years who had experienced endometriosis for 4 to 22 years participated in the study. We characterized storytelling workshop participation and the acceptability of story cocreation by describing participants' experiences of opportunity, commitment, and connection; complex emotions that were healing; and a desire to share. Feasibility was demonstrated through 100% engagement in the workshops. All 6 storytellers reported feeling empowered by publicly sharing their cocreated digital stories through social media and the Sex, Pain & Endometriosis website. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the complexities of the story-building process, the workshop and the cocreation and sharing of digital stories were feasible. The storytellers found that this process allowed for emotional healing and personal empowerment by offering a unique way to talk about painful sex, which also facilitated a connection among those in the workshop. The use of digital storytelling as a knowledge translation tool shows promise, and this approach also has potential as a therapeutic intervention.

Association of Central Sensitization Inventory Scores With Pain Outcomes After Endometriosis Surgery.

Importance: A subset of people who undergo surgery for endometriosis have persistent pain, suggesting that other factors besides the endometriosis, such as central sensitization, may play a role in this pain. The Central Sensitization Inventory, a validated self-reported questionnaire of central sensitization symptoms, may identify individuals with endometriosis who have more pain after surgery due to pain sensitization. Objective: To examine whether greater baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores are associated with postsurgical pain outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study performed at a tertiary center for endometriosis and pelvic pain in British Columbia, Canada, included all patients aged 18 to 50 years with diagnosed or suspected endometriosis and a baseline visit between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, who underwent surgery after the baseline visit. Individuals who were menopausal, had a prior hysterectomy, or were missing data for outcomes or measures were excluded. Data analysis was performed from July 2021 to June 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was chronic pelvic pain at follow-up measured on a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 to 3 indicating no pain or mild pain, 4 to 6 indicating moderate pain, and 7 to 10 indicating severe pain. Secondary outcomes were deep dyspareunia, dysmenorrhea, dyschezia, and back pain at follow-up. The main variable of interest was baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score (measured from 0 to 100, consisting of 25 self-reported questions rated from 0 to 4 [never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always, respectively]). Results: A total of 239 patients (mean [SD] age, 34 [7] years; 189 [79.1%] White [11 (5.8%) identified as White mixed with another ethnicity], 1 [0.4%] Black or African American, 29 [12.1%] Asian, 2 [0.8%] Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 16 [6.7%] other, and 2 [0.8%] mixed race or ethnicity) with follow-up data at more than 4 months after surgery were included in this study (71.0% follow-up rate). The mean (SD) baseline Central Sensitization Inventory score was 43.8 (18.2), and the mean (SD) follow-up was 16.1 (6.1) months. Higher baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores were significantly associated with higher chronic pelvic pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02), deep dyspareunia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P = .004), dyschezia (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04; P < .001), and back pain (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .02) at follow-up, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory scores themselves decreased slightly from baseline to follow-up (mean [SD] score, 43.8 [18.2] vs 41.7 [18.9]; P = .05); however, individuals with high baseline Central Sensitization Inventory scores still had high scores at follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 239 patients with endometriosis, higher Central Sensitization Inventory scores at baseline were associated with worse pain outcomes after endometriosis surgery, when controlling for baseline pain scores. The Central Sensitization Inventory could be used to counsel patients with endometriosis on their expected outcomes after surgery.

Reoperation and pain-related outcomes after hysterectomy for endometriosis by oophorectomy status.

BACKGROUND: More research is needed that compares the outcomes between those who underwent a hysterectomy for endometriosis with conservation of one or both ovaries and those who underwent a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the rate and types of reoperations (primary outcome) and use of other pain-related health services (secondary outcomes) among people who underwent a hysterectomy with conservation of both ovaries, those who underwent a hysterectomy with unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and those who underwent a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a population-based, retrospective cohort study of 4489 patients aged 19 to 50 years in British Columbia, Canada, who underwent a hysterectomy for endometriosis between 2001 and 2016. Index surgeries were classified as hysterectomy alone (conservation of both ovaries), hysterectomy with unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, or hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Reoperation rate was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes (measured at 3-12 months and 1-5 years after hysterectomy) included physician visits for endometriosis and pelvic pain, prescriptions filled for opioids, and use of hormonal suppression medications and hormone replacement therapy. RESULTS: Reoperation rates were low across all groups, with 89.5% of all patients remaining reoperation free by the end of follow-up (median of 10 years; interquartile range, 6.1-14.3 years). Patients who underwent a hysterectomy alone were more likely to undergo at least 1 reoperation when compared with those who underwent a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (13% vs 5%; P<.0001), most commonly an oophorectomy or adhesiolysis. When oophorectomy as reoperation was removed in a sensitivity analysis, this difference was partially attenuated (6% of hysterectomy alone group vs 3% of hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy group undergoing at least 1 reoperation). All groups were very similar in terms of rates of physician visits for endometriosis or pelvic pain and the number of days of opioid prescriptions filled. Furthermore, the rate of hormonal suppression medication use was similar among the groups, whereas the rate of prescriptions filled for hormone replacement therapy after hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was 60.6% of patients who filled at least 1 prescription at 3 to 12 months after index surgery. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent a hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy had a lower reoperation rate than those who underwent a hysterectomy with conservation of one or both ovaries. However, there was little difference between the groups for the secondary outcomes measured, including physician visits for endometriosis and pelvic pain, opioid use, and use of hormonal suppression medications, suggesting that persistent pelvic pain after hysterectomy for endometriosis may not differ substantively based on ovarian conservation status. One limitation was the inability to stratify patients by stage of endometriosis or to determine the impact of endometriosis stage or the presence of adnexal disease or deep endometriosis on the outcomes. Moreover, hormone replacement therapy prescriptions was not filled by about 40% of patients after hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, which may have significant health consequences for these individuals undergoing premature surgical menopause. Therefore, strong consideration should be given to ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy for endometriosis.

Underrecognition of Dysmenorrhea Is an Iatrogenic Harm.

Many patients face years of recurrent and debilitating menstrual pain that affects their ability to work and study. Patients often normalize their severe pain as an expected part of menses. Both underrecognition and lack of awareness of available therapies for this remediable condition serve as a quintessential example of hermeneutic injustice. Hermeneutic injustice describes a structural lack of access to epistemic resources, such as shared concepts and knowledge. Pervasive menstrual stigma further discourages people with dysmenorrhea from discussing their symptoms and seeking health care. A lack of respect for women's experiences of pain in clinical encounters acts to worsen these issues and should be considered a source of iatrogenic harm. Health care workers can promote hermeneutic justice by preemptively destigmatizing discussions about menstruation and validating patients' concerns. On a systemic level, there should be greater awareness of dysmenorrhea and the various treatments availabe for it.