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.

Comprehensive quantitative sensory testing shows altered sensory function in women with chronic pelvic pain: results from the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) Study.

ABSTRACT: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP), despite its high prevalence, is still relatively poorly understood mechanistically. This study, as part of the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) project, has used a full quantitative sensory testing (QST) paradigm to profile n = 85 women with and without CPP (endometriosis or bladder pain specifically). We used the foot as a control site and abdomen as the test site. Across 5 diagnostically determined subgroups, we found features which are common across different aetiologies, eg, gain of function in pressure pain threshold (PPT) when assessing responses from the lower abdomen or pelvis (referred pain site). However, disease-specific phenotypes were also identified, eg, greater mechanical allodynia in endometriosis, despite there being large heterogeneities within diagnostic groups. The most common QST sensory phenotype was mechanical hyperalgesia (>50% across all the groups). A "healthy' sensory phenotype was seen in <7% of CPP participants. Specific QST measures correlated with sensory symptoms assessed by the painDETECT questionnaire (pressure-evoked pain [painDETECT] and PPT [QST] [ r = 0.47, P < 0.001]; mechanical hyperalgesia (painDETECT) and mechanical pain sensitivity [MPS from QST] [ r = 0.38, P = 0.009]). The data suggest that participants with CPP are sensitive to both deep tissue and cutaneous inputs, suggesting that central mechanisms may be important in this cohort. We also see phenotypes such as thermal hyperalgesia, which may be the result of peripheral mechanisms, such as irritable nociceptors. This highlights the importance of stratifying patients into clinically meaningful phenotypes, which may have implications for the development of better therapeutic strategies for CPP.

Clinical profiling of specific diagnostic subgroups of women with chronic pelvic pain.

Introduction: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a common condition affecting up to 26.6% of women, with many suffering for several years before diagnosis and/or treatment. Its clinical presentation is varied and there are frequently comorbid conditions both within and outside the pelvis. We aim to explore whether specific subgroups of women with CPP report different clinical symptoms and differing impact of pain on their quality of life (QoL). Methods: The study is part of the Translational Research in Pelvic Pain (TRiPP) project which is a cross-sectional observational cohort study. The study includes 769 female participants of reproductive age who completed an extensive set of questions derived from standardised WERF EPHect questionnaires. Within this population we defined a control group (reporting no pelvic pain, no bladder pain syndrome, and no endometriosis diagnosis, N = 230) and four pain groups: endometriosis-associated pain (EAP, N = 237), interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (BPS, N = 72), comorbid endometriosis-associated pain and BPS (EABP, N = 120), and pelvic pain only (PP, N = 127). Results: Clinical profiles of women with CPP (13-50 years old) show variability of clinical symptoms. The EAP and EABP groups scored higher than the PP group (p < 0.001) on the pain intensity scales for non-cyclical pelvic pain and higher than both the BPS and PP groups (p < 0.001) on the dysmenorrhoea scale. The EABP group also had significantly higher scores for dyspareunia (p < 0.001), even though more than 50% of sexually active participants in each pain group reported interrupting and/or avoiding sexual intercourse due to pain in the last 12 months. Scores for the QoL questionnaire (SF-36) reveal that CPP patients had significantly lower QoL across all SF-36 subscales (p < 0.001). Significant effects were also observed between the pain groups for pain interference with their work (p < 0.001) and daily lives (p < 0.001), with the EABP suffering more compared to the EAP and PP groups (p < 0.001). Discussion: Our results demonstrate the negative impact that chronic pain has on CPP patients' QoL and reveal an increased negative impact of pain on the comorbid EABP group. Furthermore, it demonstrates the importance of dyspareunia in women with CPP. Overall, our results demonstrate the need for further exploration of interventions targeting QoL more broadly and suggest that novel approaches to classifying women with CPP are needed.

Effectiveness of laparoscopic removal of isolated superficial peritoneal endometriosis for the management of chronic pelvic pain in women (ESPriT2): protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis affects 190 million women and those assigned female at birth worldwide. For some, it is associated with debilitating chronic pelvic pain. Diagnosis of endometriosis is often achieved through diagnostic laparoscopy. However, when isolated superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SPE), the most common endometriosis subtype, is identified during laparoscopy, limited evidence exists to support the common decision to surgically remove it via excision or ablation. Improved understanding of the impact of surgical removal of isolated SPE for the management of chronic pelvic pain in women is required. Here, we describe our protocol for a multi-centre trial to determine the effectiveness of surgical removal of isolated SPE for the management of endometriosis-associated pain. METHODS: We plan to undertake a multi-centre participant-blind parallel-group randomised controlled clinical and cost-effectiveness trial with internal pilot. We plan to randomise 400 participants from up to 70 National Health Service Hospitals in the UK. Participants with chronic pelvic pain awaiting diagnostic laparoscopy for suspected endometriosis will be consented by the clinical research team. If isolated SPE is identified at laparoscopy, and deep or ovarian endometriosis is not seen, participants will be randomised intraoperatively (1:1) to surgical removal (by excision or ablation or both, according to surgeons' preference) versus diagnostic laparoscopy alone. Randomisation with block-stratification will be used. Participants will be given a diagnosis but will not be informed of the procedure they received until 12 months post-randomisation, unless required. Post-operative medical treatment will be according to participants' preference. Participants will be asked to complete validated pain and quality of life questionnaires at 3, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Our primary outcome is the pain domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 (EHP-30), via a between randomised group comparison of adjusted means at 12 months. Assuming a standard deviation of 22 points around the pain score, 90% power, 5% significance and 20% missing data, 400 participants are required to be randomised to detect an 8-point pain score difference. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to provide high quality evidence of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of surgical removal of isolated SPE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN27244948. Registered 6 April 2021.

Danish translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and electronic migration of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonisation Project Endometriosis Patient Questionnaire.

Objectives: This study aims to translate and cross-culturally adapt the standard version of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) EPHect Endometriosis Patient Questionnaire (EPQ) into Danish and to ensure equivalence of a Danish electronic version. Methods: The translation, cultural adaption, and electronic migration followed recommendations from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and the Critical Path Institute. Ten women with endometriosis were enrolled for cognitive debriefing of the paper version (pEPQ) after translation and back translation. The questionnaire was then migrated into an electronic version (eEPQ) and subsequently tested for usability and measurement equivalence by five women with endometriosis. Results: Cross-cultural alterations were needed for medical terms, response options for ethnicity, the educational system, and measurement units. Thirteen questions were altered after back translation, while 21 underwent minor changes after cognitive debriefing. After testing the eEPQ, 13 questions were altered. Questions tested for measurement equivalence across the two modes of administration were found comparable. The median time-to-complete the pEPQ and eEPQ was 62 min (range: 29-110) and 63 min (range: 31-88), respectively. General comments included the questionnaire being relevant but long and repetitive. Conclusions: We find the the Danish pEPQ and eEPQ similar and comparable to the original English instrument. However, attention must be drawn to questions regarding measurement units, ethnicity, and educational systems before cross-country comparison. The Danish pEPQ and eEPQ are suitable for obtaining subjective data on women with endometriosis.

Temporal and regional differences in the incidence of hospital-diagnosed endometriosis: a Danish population-based study.

INTRODUCTION: Due to diagnostic challenges, normalization of symptoms and an overall lack of awareness among both patients and physicians, endometriosis is an underdiagnosed disease. This can result in delayed treatment and potentially worsening of the disease. Despite initiatives, such as patients' support organizations and specialized endometriosis referral centers, differences in awareness, socioeconomic factors and lifestyle, combined with varying distances to specialized referral centers, could result in regional differences in the degree of underdiagnosing. This study aims to explore temporal and regional variations in the incidence of endometriosis based on the Danish hospital discharge register, and shed light on the degree of underdiagnosing of endometriosis in Denmark. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This registry-based cohort study included all women aged 15-55 living in Denmark from 1990-2017. Participants were identified through the Danish Civil Registration system and endometriosis diagnoses received at a hospital were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry. Incidence rates of diagnosed endometriosis were calculated for each year of the study period and for each municipality in Denmark. A Cox regression analysis, stratified by calendar time and adjusted for ethnic origin, household composition, highest educational level and family socioeconomic status, was performed to estimate the association between residence and likelihood of receiving a hospital-based diagnosis of endometriosis. RESULTS: The nationwide incidence rate of hospital-diagnosed endometriosis was 7.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.80-7.99) per 10 000 person-years and the prevalence in 2017 was 1.63%. The results showed an overall increase in the incidence of diagnosed endometriosis of 46.8% (95% CI 32.9-62.2) during the study period and also displayed significant regional differences. After adjustments, women living in northern Jutland had the highest probability of receiving a hospital-based diagnosis of endometriosis (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% CI 1.09-1.18), whereas women living in northern Zealand had the lowest probability (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.60-0.67) compared with eastern Jutland. These regional differences have become more evident over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal significant regional differences in the incidence of hospital-diagnosed endometriosis, suggesting that a significant number of women may be left behind without a diagnosis. Further studies are needed to assess the underlying reasons for the significant regional differences.

Protocol for the Cultural Translation and Adaptation of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonization Project Endometriosis Participant Questionnaire (EPHect).

Endometriosis affects 10% of women worldwide and is one of the most common causes of chronic pelvic pain and infertility. However, causal mechanisms of this disease remain unknown due to its heterogeneous presentation. In order to successfully study its phenotypic variation, large sample sizes are needed. Pooling of data across sites is not always feasible given the large variation in the complexity and quality of the data collected. The World Endometriosis Research Foundation (WERF) Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonization Project (EPHect) have developed an endometriosis participant questionnaire (EPQ) to harmonize non-surgical clinical participant characteristic data relevant to endometriosis research, allowing for large-scale collaborations in English-speaking populations. Although the WERF EPHect EPQs have been translated into different languages, no study has examined the cross-cultural translation and adaptation for content and face validity. In order to investigate this, we followed the standard guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation and translation of the minimum version of the EPQ (EPQ-M) using 40 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery in Turkey and 40 women in Northern Cyprus, aged between 18 and 55. We assessed the consistency by using cognitive testing and found the EPHect EPQ-M to be comprehensive, informative, and feasible in these two Turkish-speaking populations. The translated and adapted questionnaire was found to be epidemiologically robust, taking around 30-60 min to complete; furthermore, participants reported a similar understanding of the questions, showing that common perspectives were explored. Results from the cognitive testing process led to minor additions to some items such as further descriptive and/or visuals in order to clarify medical terminology. This paper illustrates the first successful cross-cultural translation and adaptation of the EPHect EPQ-M and should act as a tool to allow for further studies that wish to use this questionnaire in different languages. Standardized tools like this should be adopted by researchers worldwide to facilitate collaboration and aid in the design and conduction of global studies to ultimately help those affected by endometriosis and its associated symptoms.

Preclinical models of endometriosis and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome: an Innovative Medicines Initiative-PainCare initiative to improve their value for translational research in pelvic pain.

ABSTRACT: Endometriosis (ENDO) and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS) are chronic pain conditions for which better treatments are urgently needed. Development of new therapies with proven clinical benefit has been slow. We have conducted a review of existing preclinical in vivo models for ENDO and IC/BPS in rodents, discussed to what extent they replicate the phenotype and pain experience of patients, as well as their relevance for translational research. In 1009 publications detailing ENDO models, 41% used autologous, 26% syngeneic, 18% xenograft, and 11% allogeneic tissue in transplantation models. Intraperitoneal injection of endometrial tissue was the subcategory with the highest construct validity score for translational research. From 1055 IC/BPS publications, most interventions were bladder centric (85%), followed by complex mechanisms (8%) and stress-induced models (7%). Within these categories, the most frequently used models were instillation of irritants (92%), autoimmune (43%), and water avoidance stress (39%), respectively. Notably, although pelvic pain is a hallmark of both conditions and a key endpoint for development of novel therapies, only a small proportion of the studies (models of ENDO: 0.5%-12% and models of IC/BPS: 20%-44%) examined endpoints associated with pain. Moreover, only 2% and 3% of publications using models of ENDO and IC/BPS investigated nonevoked pain endpoints. This analysis highlights the wide variety of models used, limiting reproducibility and translation of results. We recommend refining models so that they better reflect clinical reality, sharing protocols, and using standardized endpoints to improve reproducibility. We are addressing this in our project Innovative Medicines Initiative-PainCare/Translational Research in Pelvic Pain.

Developing consensus on core outcome domains for assessing effectiveness in perioperative pain management: results of the PROMPT/IMI-PainCare Delphi Meeting.

ABSTRACT: Postoperative pain management is still insufficient, leading to major deficits, including patient suffering, impaired surgical recovery, long-term opioid intake, and postsurgical chronic pain. Yet, identifying the best treatment options refers to a heterogeneous outcome assessment in clinical trials, not always reflecting relevant pain-related aspects after surgery and therefore hamper evidence synthesis. Establishing a core outcome set for perioperative pain management of acute pain after surgery may overcome such limitations. An international, stepwise consensus process on outcome domains ("what to measure") for pain management after surgery, eg, after total knee arthroplasty, sternotomy, breast surgery, and surgery related to endometriosis, was performed. The process, guided by a steering committee, involved 9 international stakeholder groups and patient representatives. The face-to-face meeting was prepared by systematic literature searches identifying common outcome domains for each of the 4 surgical procedures and included breakout group sessions, world-café formats, plenary panel discussions, and final voting. The panel finally suggested an overall core outcome set for perioperative pain management with 5 core outcome domains: physical function (for a condition-specific measurement), pain intensity at rest, pain intensity during activity, adverse events, and self-efficacy. Innovative aspects of this work were inclusion of the psychological domain self-efficacy, as well as the specific assessment of pain intensity during activity and physical function recommended to be assessed in a condition-specific manner. The IMI-PROMPT core outcome set seeks to improve assessing efficacy and effectiveness of perioperative pain management in any clinical and observational studies as well as in clinical practice.

Laparoscopic treatment of isolated superficial peritoneal endometriosis for managing chronic pelvic pain in women: study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial (ESPriT1).

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis (where endometrial-like tissue is found outside the uterus) affects ~ 176 million women worldwide and can lead to debilitating pelvic pain. Three subtypes of endometriosis exist, with ~ 80% of women having superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SPE). Endometriosis is diagnosed by laparoscopy and, if SPE is found, gynaecologists usually remove it surgically. However, many women get limited pain relief from surgical removal of SPE. We plan to undertake a future large trial where women who have only SPE found at initial laparoscopy are randomly allocated to have surgical removal (excision or ablation) of SPE, or not. Ultimately, we want to determine whether surgical removal improves overall symptoms and quality of life, or whether surgery is of no benefit, exacerbates symptoms, or even causes harm. The primary objective of this feasibility study is to determine what proportion of women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy will agree to randomisation. The secondary objectives are to determine if there are differences in key prognostic parameters between eligible women that agree to be randomised and those that decline; how many women having laparoscopy for investigation of chronic pelvic pain are eligible for the trial; the range of treatment effects and variability in outcomes and the most acceptable methods of recruitment, randomisation and assessment tools. METHODS: We will recruit up to 90 women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy over a 9-month recruitment period in four Scottish hospitals and randomise them 1:1 to either diagnostic laparoscopy alone (with a sham port to achieve blinding of the allocation) or surgical removal of endometriosis. Baseline characteristics, e.g. age, index of social deprivation, ethnicity, and intensity/duration of pain will be collected. Participants will be followed up by online questionnaires assessing pain, physical and emotional function at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. DISCUSSION: Recruitment to a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of surgery for endometriosis may be challenging because of preconceived ideas about treatment success amongst patients and clinicians. We have designed this study to assess feasibility of recruitment and to inform the design of our future definitive trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincicalTrials.gov, NCT04081532 STATUS: Recruiting.

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. Part 2: deep endometriosis.

STUDY QUESTION: How should surgery for endometriosis be performed? SUMMARY ANSWER: This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for deep endometriosis in women of reproductive age. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Endometriosis is highly prevalent and often associated with severe symptoms. Yet compared to equally prevalent conditions, it is poorly understood and a challenge to manage. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations for (surgical) treatment of deep endometriosis, based on the best available evidence, but without technical information and details on how to best perform such treatment in order to be effective and safe. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: A working group of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of surgery for treatment of deep endometriosis. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: This document focused on surgery for deep endometriosis and is complementary to a previous document in this series focusing on endometrioma surgery. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The document presents general recommendations for surgery for deep endometriosis, starting from preoperative assessments and first steps of surgery. Different approaches for surgical treatment are discussed and are respective of location and extent of disease; uterosacral ligaments and rectovaginal septum with or without involvement of the rectum, urinary tract or extrapelvic endometriosis. In addition, recommendations are provided on the treatment of frozen pelvis and on hysterectomy as a treatment for deep endometriosis. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. Where available, references of relevant studies were added. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These recommendations complement previous guidelines on management of endometriosis and the recommendations for surgical treatment of ovarian endometrioma. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES. Dr Roman reports personal fees from ETHICON, PLASMASURGICAL, OLYMPUS and NORDIC PHARMA, outside the submitted work; Dr Becker reports grants from Bayer AG, Volition Rx, MDNA Life Sciences and Roche Diagnostics Inc. and other relationships or activities from AbbVie Inc., and Myriad Inc, during the conduct of the study; Dr Tomassetti reports non-financial support from ESHRE, during the conduct of the study; and non-financial support and other were from Lumenis, Gedeon-Richter, Ferring Pharmaceuticals and Merck SA, outside the submitted work. The other authors had nothing to disclose. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: na.

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis-part 1: ovarian endometrioma.

STUDY QUESTION: What does this document on the surgical treatment of endometriosis jointly prepared by the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE, and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) provide? SUMMARY ANSWER: This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for endometriomas in women of reproductive age. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Endometriomas (ovarian endometriotic cysts) are a commonly diagnosed form of endometriosis, owing to the relative ease and accuracy of ultrasound diagnosis. They frequently present a clinical dilemma as to whether and how to treat them when found during imaging or incidentally during surgery. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations based on the best available evidence, but without technical details on the management of endometriosis. STUDY DESIGN SIZE AND DURATION: A working group of ESGE, ESHRE and WES collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of endometrioma surgery. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING AND METHODS: This document focused on endometrioma surgery. Further documents in this series will provide recommendations for surgery of deep and peritoneal endometriosis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The document presents general recommendations for surgery of endometrioma and specific recommendations for cystectomy, ablation by laser or by plasma energy, electrocoagulation and a combination of these techniques applied together or with an interval between them. LIMITATIONS AND REASONS FOR CAUTION: Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These recommendations complement previous guidelines on the management of endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES. CB declares to be a member of the independent data monitoring committee for a clinical study by ObsEva and receiving research grants from Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, MDNA Life Sciences and Volition. ES received honoraria for provision of training to healthcare professionals from Ethicon, Olympus and Gedeon Richter. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research Priorities for Endometriosis.

The 3rd International Consensus Workshop on Research Priorities in Endometriosis was held in São Paulo on May 4, 2014, following the 12th World Congress on Endometriosis. The workshop was attended by 60 participants from 19 countries and was divided into 5 main sessions covering pathogenesis/pathophysiology, symptoms, diagnosis/classification/prognosis, disease/symptom management, and research policy. This research priorities consensus statement builds on earlier efforts to develop research directions for endometriosis. Of the 56 research recommendations from the 2011 meeting in Montpellier, a total of 41 remained unchanged, 13 were updated, and 2 were deemed to be completed. Fifty-three new research recommendations were made at the 2014 meeting in Sao Paulo, which in addition to the 13 updated recommendations resulted in a total of 66 new recommendations for research. The research recommendations published herein, as well as those from the 2 previous papers from international consensus workshops, are an attempt to promote high-quality research in endometriosis by identifying and agreeing on key issues that require investigation. New areas included in the 2014 recommendations include infertility, patient stratification, and research in emerging nations, in addition to an increased focus on translational research. A revised and updated set of research priorities that builds on this document will be developed at the 13th World Congress on Endometriosis to be held on May 17-20, 2017, in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

World Endometriosis Society consensus on the classification of endometriosis.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the global consensus on the classification of endometriosis that considers the views of women with endometriosis? SUMMARY ANSWER: We have produced an international consensus statement on the classification of endometriosis through systematic appraisal of evidence and a consensus process that included representatives of national and international, medical and non-medical societies, patient organizations, and companies with an interest in endometriosis. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Classification systems of endometriosis, developed by several professional organizations, traditionally have been based on lesion appearance, pelvic adhesions, and anatomic location of disease. One system predicts fertility outcome and none predicts pelvic pain, response to medications, disease recurrence, risks for associated disorders, quality of life measures, and other endpoints important to women and health care providers for guiding appropriate therapeutic options and prognosis. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A consensus meeting, in conjunction with pre- and post-meeting processes, was undertaken. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: A consensus meeting was held on 30 April 2014 in conjunction with the World Endometriosis Society's 12th World Congress on Endometriosis. Rigorous pre- and post-meeting processes, involving 55 representatives of 29 national and international, medical and non-medical organizations from a range of disciplines, led to this consensus statement. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 28 consensus statements were made. Of all, 10 statements had unanimous consensus, however none of the statements was made without expression of a caveat about the strength of the statement or the statement itself. Two statements did not achieve majority consensus. The statements covered women's priorities, aspects of classification, impact of low resources, as well as all the major classification systems for endometriosis. Until better classification systems are developed, we propose a classification toolbox (that includes the revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine and, where appropriate, the Enzian and Endometriosis Fertility Index staging systems), that may be used by all surgeons in each case of surgery undertaken for women with endometriosis. We also propose wider use of the World Endometriosis Research Foundation Endometriosis Phenome and Biobanking Harmonisation Project surgical and clinical data collection tools for research to improve classification of endometriosis in the future, of particular relevance when surgery is not undertaken. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: This consensus process differed from that of formal guideline development, although based on the same available evidence. A different group of international experts from those participating in this process may have yielded subtly different consensus statements. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first time that a large, global, consortium-representing 29 major stake-holding organizations, from 19 countries - has convened to systematically evaluate the best available evidence on the classification of endometriosis and reach consensus. In addition to 21 international medical organizations and companies, representatives from eight national endometriosis organizations were involved, including lay support groups, thus generating and including input from women who suffer from endometriosis in an endeavour to keep uppermost the goal of optimizing quality of life for women with endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The World Endometriosis Society convened and hosted the consensus meeting. Financial support for participants to attend the meeting was provided by the organizations that they represented. There was no other specific funding for this consensus process. Mauricio Abrao is an advisor to Bayer Pharma, and a consultant to AbbVie and AstraZeneca; G David Adamson is the Owner of Advanced Reproductive Care Inc and Ziva and a consultant to Bayer Pharma, Ferring, and AbbVie; Deborah Bush has received travel grants from Fisher & Paykel Healthcare and Bayer Pharmaceuticals; Linda Giudice is a consultant to AbbVie, Juniper Pharmaceutical, and NextGen Jane, holds research grant from the NIH, is site PI on a clinical trial sponsored by Bayer, and is a shareholder in Merck and Pfizer; Lone Hummelshoj is an unpaid consultant to AbbVie; Neil Johnson has received conference expenses from Bayer Pharma, Merck-Serono, and MSD, research funding from AbbVie, and is a consultant to Vifor Pharma and Guerbet; Jörg Keckstein has received a travel grant from AbbVie; Ludwig Kiesel is a consultant to Bayer Pharma, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gedeon Richter, and Shionogi, and holds a research grant from Bayer Pharma; Luk Rombauts is an advisor to MSD, Merck Serono, and Ferring, and a shareholder in Monash IVF. The following have declared that they have nothing to disclose: Kathy Sharpe Timms; Rulla Tamimi; Hugh Taylor. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Recommendations for the Surgical Treatment of Endometriosis. Part 1: Ovarian Endometrioma.

STUDY QUESTION: What does this document on the surgical treatment of endometriosis jointly prepared by the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE, and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) provide? SUMMARY ANSWER: This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for endometriomas in women of reproductive age. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Endometriomas (ovarian endometriotic cysts) are a commonly diagnosed form of endometriosis, owing to the relative ease and accuracy of ultrasound diagnosis. They frequently present a clinical dilemma as to whether and how to treat them when found during imaging or incidentally during surgery. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations based on the best available evidence, but without technical details on the management of endometriosis. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: A working group of ESGE, ESHRE and WES collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of endometrioma surgery. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: This document focused on endometrioma surgery. Further documents in this series will provide recommendations for surgery of deep and peritoneal endometriosis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The document presents general recommendations for surgery of endometrioma, and specific recommendations for cystectomy, ablation by laser or by plasma energy, electrocoagulation and a combination of these techniques applied together or with an interval between them. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These recommendations complement previous guidelines on the management of endometriosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES. C.B. declares to be a member of the independent data monitoring committee for a clinical study by ObsEva, and receiving research grants from Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, MDNA Life Sciences, and Volition. E.S. received honoraria for provision of training to healthcare professionals from Ethicon, Olympus and Gedeon Richter. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NA.

Risk factors of epithelial ovarian carcinomas among women with endometriosis: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this review was to evaluate the published literature on epidemiologic risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer among women with a diagnosis of endometriosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus. Studies comparing epidemiologic risk factors of epithelial ovarian cancer among women with endometriosis were included. A quality assessment was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Eight of 794 articles met the inclusion criteria. A lower risk of epithelial ovarian cancer was observed in women with documented complete surgical excision of endometriotic tissue and suggested among women with unilateral oophorectomy. The use of oral contraceptives (≥10 years) may be associated with a lower risk of epithelial ovarian cancer among women with endometriosis, whereas older age at endometriosis diagnosis (≥45 years, pre- or postmenopausal), nulliparity, hyperestrogenism (endogenous or exogenous), premenopausal status at endometriosis diagnosis, solid compartments as well as larger size of endometrioma (≥9 cm in diameter at endometriosis diagnosis) were all associated with an increased risk of ovarian cancer. CONCLUSIONS: A subgroup of women with endometriosis characterized by endometriosis observed through surgery or imaging after the age of 45 years, nulliparity, postmenopausal status at endometriosis diagnosis, larger size of endometrioma (>9 cm) at endometriosis diagnosis, hyperestrogenism (endogenous or exogenous) and/or cysts with solid compartments may have an elevated risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. However, due to the limited number and size of studies in this area we cannot draw definitive conclusions. Further research into a risk factor profile among women with endometriosis is needed before clear recommendations can be made.