MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206114597 · doi:10.1080/03007995.2022.2031144

The use of progestin subdermal implants in the management of endometriosis-related pain symptoms and quality of life: a systematic review

2022· review· en· W4206114597 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin Ambacher, Michael Secter, Ari P. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePelvic painEndometriosisMedroxyprogesterone acetateProgestinImplantRandomized controlled trialObservational studyQuality of life (healthcare)Visual analogue scaleGynecologySurgeryObstetricsInternal medicineEstrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for the use of progestin subdermal implants for the treatment of endometriosis-related pain symptoms and quality of life.Methods A literature search of PubMed, Ovid (MEDLINE and EMBASE), and Web of Science was performed from inception to December 2020. In addition, a targeted search of cited references was also performed. Our search identified 330 articles of which 17 were deemed eligible for full-text review. Eligible studies included randomized control trials, observational studies, and case series with at least 5 cases, investigating the effect of progestin subdermal implants on endometriosis-related pain scores in women of reproductive age with a clinical, radiologic, or surgical diagnosis of endometriosis. Six articles were excluded after the full-text screen.Results Eleven articles describing a total of 335 patients were eligible for inclusion. Across all studies, etonogestrel- and segesterone-releasing progestin subdermal implants improved VAS pain scores for cyclic pelvic pain/dysmenorrhea (VAS at baseline ranged from 6.1 to 7.5 cm and after treatment from 1.7 to 4.9 cm, n = 121), non-cyclic pelvic pain (baseline VAS 7.2–7.6 cm and after treatment 2.0–3.7 cm, n = 96) and dyspareunia (baseline VAS 1.61–8.3 cm and after treatment 1.0–7.1 cm, n = 87). Symptom improvement with the progestin subdermal implant was equivalent to treatment with depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA; average baseline VAS 6.5 and after DMPA treatment 3.0, compared to 2.0 after treatment with the implant) or the 52 mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS; baseline cyclic and non-cyclic pain scores 7.3 and 7.4 respectively decreased to 1.9 and 1.9 after LNG-IUS treatment). Improvements were also demonstrated in quality-of-life scores (average improvement of 36% in all domains of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 and significant improvements in social functioning, general health, bodily pain, vitality and mental health domains on the Short Form-36 questionnaire) and sexual function (total sexual function score improved from 24 to 25.35 and 26.25 at 6 and 12 months).Conclusion Etonogestrel- and segesterone-releasing progestin subdermal implants appear to improve endometriosis-related pain symptoms and quality of life and may provide an additional component in the management of endometriosis. However, this systematic review is limited by the small sample size and heterogeneity in the data. As such, larger prospective randomized trials are needed to guide further management. PROSPERO Registration CRD42021225665

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.417
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.106 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207