MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4411745008 · doi:10.1093/humrep/deaf097.199

O-199 The association between endometriosis and endometrial polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4411745008 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Irene La Vecchia, Antonella Fiore, Noemi Salmeri, Dalila Invernici, Gianfranco Fornelli, Sabrina Comana, Laura Benaglia, Paola Viganò, Maíra Casalechi, Edgardo Somigliana

Notice bibliographique

RevueHuman Reproduction · 2025
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMeta-analysisEndometriosisEndometrial PolypMedicineSystematic reviewGynecologyMEDLINEInternal medicineBiologyHysteroscopy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Study question What is the prevalence of endometrial polyps in women with endometriosis and vice versa? Summary answer Available data showed that there is a bidirectional association between endometriosis and endometrial polyps, particularly in infertile women. What is known already Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent chronic disease that affects women during their reproductive age and is a recognized contributor to infertility. It is associated with some uterine comorbidities which may independently impact fertility by disrupting endometrial receptivity. In this context, however, the relationship between endometriosis and endometrial polyps remains poorly defined, both in the general population and among infertile women. Understanding this association is crucial for improving diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, especially in infertility Study design, size, duration This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search of the literature was performed in the databases PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from inception up to October 2024. Only observational, peer-reviewed studies published in English were eligible. We included studies reporting the prevalence of endometrial polyps in women with endometriosis and/or endometriosis in women diagnosed with polyps. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and evidence certainty was graded using GRADE guidelines. Participants/materials, setting, methods For studies that met inclusion criteria, pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Subgroup analyses considered the presence of infertility and the diagnostic modalities of endometriosis and polyps. A gradient effect was evaluated for disease severity (stage III–IV vs. stage I–II) and location (ovarian and deep endometriosis). The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024595167). Main results and the role of chance Twenty-two studies encompassing 10,928 patients (8,154 with infertility) were included. Women with endometriosis had a significantly higher risk of endometrial polyps (RR 2.18, 95%CI: 1.58–3.00). In infertile endometriosis women, the risk increased further (RR 2.37, 95%CI: 1.68–3.34, I²=86.3%). The subgroup analysis based on surgery-confirmed endometriosis and histology-confirmed polyps showed even an higher association (RR 2.53, 95%CI: 1.74–3.68, I²=86.8%). Similarly, women with polyps had a higher risk of endometriosis (RR 2.05, 95%CI: 1.61–2.62). This trend was also evident in infertile women with polyps (RR 2.08, 95%CI: 1.62–2.67, I²=86.1%) and in cases where both endometriosis and polyps were confirmed through surgery and histology, respectively (RR 2.01, 95%CI: 1.61–2.51, I²=84.0%). A gradient effect was observed, showing that women with stage III–IV endometriosis had a higher risk of developing polyps compared to those with stage I–II endometriosis (RR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.08–1.32). Furthermore, in the total cohort, stage III–IV endometriosis was associated with a significantly elevated risk of polyps compared to no endometriosis (RR 2.97, 95% CI: 2.41–3.67, I²=50.7%). Limitations, reasons for caution The quality of the evidence was low according to GRADE guidelines, limiting the reliability of the findings. Additionally, we observed substantial heterogeneity across studies. Lastly, the majority of studies focused on infertile population and we cannot rule out the possibility of a selection bias in observational studies. Wider implications of the findings The strong association between endometriosis and endometrial polyps highlights the importance for improved detection and tailored interventions. Exploring shared mechanisms may reveal new therapeutic targets and enhance fertility outcomes. These findings could inform evidence-based guidelines for managing these co-occurring conditions. Trial registration number No

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,054
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Méta-analyse · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,619
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,054
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0100,003
Bibliométrie0,0030,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,149
Tête enseignante GPT0,421
Écart entre enseignants0,272 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeMéta-analyse
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHuman ReproductionMême sujetEndometriosis Research and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207