Physiologic estradiol replacement therapy and cardiac structure and function in normal postmenopausal women: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial
To assess the effect of estradiol (E2) replacement therapy on cardiac structure and function in healthy postmenopausal women.
Methods
We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study of 31 healthy postmenopausal female volunteer study subjects (55-65 years) using 12 weeks of micronized E2 replacement therapy (2 mg/day). Echocardiography and Doppler techniques were used to assess the cardiac effects of E2 at rest and during graded bicycle ergometry.
Results
Crossover analysis demonstrated no carryover effects of estrogen treatment (which increased serum E2 15-fold to 37.6 pmol/L) on the cardiac characteristics measured. Estradiol treatment did not affect measurements of systolic function, diastolic function, left ventricular mass, or pulmonary artery pressure at rest or during bicycle ergometry. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume at rest was slightly higher with E2 treatment (P = .03). However, this change was not reflected by changes in stroke volume, ejection fraction, or cardiac output.
Conclusions
Estrogen replacement therapy, which results in physiologic serum concentrations, does not affect cardiac structure or function in normal postmenopausal women after 12 weeks of treatment.
PMID 9052580 9052580 DOI 10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00521-2 10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00521-2
Cite this article
Snabes, M. C., Payne, J. P., Kopelen, H. A., Dunn, J. K., Young, R. L., & Zoghbi, W. A. (1997). Physiologic estradiol replacement therapy and cardiac structure and function in normal postmenopausal women: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Obstetrics and gynecology, 89(3), 332-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00521-2
Snabes MC, Payne JP, Kopelen HA, Dunn JK, Young RL, Zoghbi WA. Physiologic estradiol replacement therapy and cardiac structure and function in normal postmenopausal women: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(3):332-339. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00521-2
Snabes, M. C., et al. "Physiologic estradiol replacement therapy and cardiac structure and function in normal postmenopausal women: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial." Obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 89, no. 3, 1997, pp. 332-339.
A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized multiple crossover study was designed to determine the effectiveness of alprazolam in the treatment of premenstrual syndrome. Patients maintained daily diaries of 22 premenstrual symptoms for one pretreatment control cycle and four treatment cycles. Alprazolam 0.25 mg or placebo was administered three times daily from cycle day 20 until the second day of menstruation, at which time the dosage was tapered by one tablet per day to minimize withdrawal effects. The results of the clinical trial indicate that alprazolam is significantly more effective than placebo in relieving the severity of premenstrual nervous tension, mood swings, irritability, anxiety, depression, fatigue, forgetfulness, crying, cravings for sweets, abdominal bloating, abdominal cramps, and headache. The low incidence of side effects makes alprazolam an acceptable treatment for premenstrual syndrome for those women unresponsive to other therapies.
The use of mefenamic acid in the treatment of premenstrual syndrome (PMS) was investigated in 15 women over six menstrual cycles. A randomized, double-blind, cross-over, placebo-controlled design was used to overcome the methodologic criticisms of other medication trials in this condition. Mefenamic acid significantly improved many of the physical, mood, and performance symptoms associated with PMS. The physical symptoms that showed marked improvement were fatigue, headache, and general aches and pains (P less than .001). Most mood symptoms were improved, the most significant being freedom from mood swings (P less than .005).
Perimenopause/MenopauseProgesterone vs ProgestinsCardiovascular EffectsRandomized Crossover Design
We sought to compare the effects of estrogen/transvaginal progesterone gel with estrogen/medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) on exercise-induced myocardial ischemia in postmenopausal women with coronary artery disease or previous myocardial infarction, or both. Estrogen therapy beneficially affects exercise-induced myocardial ischemia in postmenopausal women; however, women with an intact uterus also take progestin to protect against uterine malignancies. The effects of combination estrogen/progestin therapy on myocardial ischemia are unknown. Eighteen postmenopausal women (mean +/- SD age 59+/-7 years) were given 17-beta-estradiol in single-blinded manner for four weeks (1 mg/day for three weeks then 2 mg/day for one week). Estradiol (2 mg/day) was then continued, and the patients were randomized (double-blind) for 12 days to either transvaginal progesterone gel (90 mg on alternate days) and oral MPA placebo (10 mg/day), or vice versa. After another two weeks on estradiol alone, the patients crossed over to progestin treatment and repeated the protocol on the opposite treatment. Patients underwent treadmill exercise testing after each estradiol phase and at day 10 of each progestin phase. Exercise time to myocardial ischemia increased after the first estrogen phase as compared with baseline (mean difference with 95% confidence interval [CI]: 72 s [34 to 110], p = 0.001), and was increased by combination estradiol/progesterone therapy as compared with estradiol/MPA therapy (92 s [35 to 149], p = 0.001)). Two patients (11%) were withdrawn while taking estradiol/MPA owing to unstable angina. Combination estrogen/transvaginal progesterone gel increases exercise time to myocardial ischemia, as compared with estrogen/MPA. These results imply that the choice of progestin in women at higher cardiovascular risk requires careful consideration.
EndometriosisFertility OutcomesEndometriosis Surgery ClaimsReproductive Treatment Access
For many patients with endometriosis, laparoscopic surgery is the most effective treatment to alleviate severe chronic pelvic pain and improve quality of life. Because endometriosis is common among individuals with infertility, surgery is often considered alongside fertility evaluation and treatment to manage symptoms, identify disease pathology, and restore pelvic anatomy. In patients who desire pregnancy, the decision of whether and when to pursue surgery should be guided by clear medical indications and shared decision making between the patient and their obstetrician-gynecologist. In recent months, however, religious and political groups have sought to reframe this medical decision as an ideologic and moral one, advocating for endometriosis surgery in nearly all patients with infertility and claiming that this can eliminate the need for assisted reproductive technologies. This framework, known as restorative reproductive medicine (RRM), aligns with efforts to promote the "personhood" of fertilized eggs, restrict access to in in vitro fertilization (IVF), and advance endometriosis surgery and lifestyle modifications as "root-cause treatment leading to natural fertility." Recent editorials and issue briefs in the obstetrics and gynecology literature have discussed the serious ethical, medical, and policy implications of RRM, yet there remains an urgent need to address specifically the unfounded claims about endometriosis surgery and its purported advantages over assisted reproductive technology. This article examines the social context of this controversy and reviews the current evidence regarding the indications, benefits, and limitations of endometriosis surgery in the management of infertility. In contrast to RRM's assertions, no evidence supports the adoption of endometriosis surgery as a replacement for IVF or as a primary treatment for infertility. Rather, the role of surgery in fertility care is highly nuanced and depends on each patient's clinical presentation, reproductive goals, and personal priorities.