To evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of leuprolide versus placebo in managing chronic pelvic pain in women with clinically suspected endometriosis.
Methods
Women 18-45 years of age with moderate to severe pelvic pain of at least 6 months' duration underwent extensive, noninvasive diagnostic testing and laboratory evaluation, including pelvic ultrasound, complete blood count, determination of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and endocervical cultures. Those with clinically suspected endometriosis were randomized to double-blind treatment for 3 months with depot leuprolide (3.75 mg/mo) or placebo. The accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of endometriosis was evaluated by posttreatment laparoscopy.
Results
Of 100 women randomized, 95 completed the study: 49 in the leuprolide group and 46 in the placebo group. Women in the leuprolide group had clinically and statistically significant (P < or = .001) mean improvements from baseline after 12 weeks of therapy in all pain measures. These mean improvements were significantly greater (P < or = .001) than those in the placebo group. At 12 weeks, mean decreases in physician-rated scores for dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain, and pelvic tenderness were 1.7, 1.0, and 0.8 points greater, respectively, in the leuprolide group than in the placebo group (on a four-point scale). Thirty-eight (78%) of 49 and 40 (87%) of 46 patients in the leuprolide and placebo groups, respectively, had laparoscopically confirmed endometriosis after 12 weeks of treatment. No women withdrew from the study because of adverse events.
Conclusion
Depot leuprolide was effective and safe for treating patients with chronic pelvic pain and clinically suspected endometriosis, confirming the potential of its empiric use in these patients.
PMID 9916956 9916956 DOI 10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00341-x 10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00341-x
Cite this article
Ling, F. W. (1999). Randomized controlled trial of depot leuprolide in patients with chronic pelvic pain and clinically suspected endometriosis. Pelvic Pain Study Group. Obstetrics and gynecology, 93(1), 51-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00341-x
Ling FW. Randomized controlled trial of depot leuprolide in patients with chronic pelvic pain and clinically suspected endometriosis. Pelvic Pain Study Group. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93(1):51-58. doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00341-x
Ling, F. W. "Randomized controlled trial of depot leuprolide in patients with chronic pelvic pain and clinically suspected endometriosis. Pelvic Pain Study Group." Obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 93, no. 1, 1999, pp. 51-58.
To assess the efficacy and diagnostic value of GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) therapy in cases of hidden sciatic nerve endometriosis. Case report. Academic tertiary referral center for endometriosis treatment. PATIENT(S): Three patients with cyclic, catamenial sciatica associated with pelvic endometriosis who had electromyographic evidence of sciatic nerve damage but negative computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging findings. INTERVENTION(S): Monthly administration of the GnRH-a leuprolide acetate plus daily transdermal E2 (25 microg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Relief of pain symptoms and improvement in motor function. RESULT(S): All three patients had clear decreases in pain and partial amelioration of claudication. CONCLUSION(S): Endometriosis of the sciatic nerve may be hard to diagnose with the use of current imaging techniques but may be proved by clinical response to GnRH analogue treatment and may be more frequent than previously thought.
The physiological requirement for activation of pituitary gonadotrophin secretion by pulsatile LHRH stimulation is discussed, and compared with the effect of pituitary stimulation by LHRH agonists. Initial stimulation is followed by a phase of progressive pituitary and gonadal inhibition. This inhibition is fully reversible at the end of agonist treatment. Clinical applications of high dose suppression are the treatment of precocious puberty and hormone-dependent tumours (mammary and prostatic carcinoma). In women, agonist administration by nasal spray is a reversible method of inhibiting ovulation, and may also be useful in the treatment of endometriosis. Clinical advantages of agonist therapy are favourable biological tolerance, lack of side effects and rapid reversibility.
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.
To assess the Pearl Index for risk of ectopic pregnancy in women using levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUS) with hormonal reservoirs of 13.5 mg, 19.5 mg, or 52 mg. This was a retrospective cohort study. Women diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy in Stockholm County, Sweden, between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019, were identified through the electronic medical record system. The final analysis included 2,252 cases of ectopic pregnancy. Information on age, reproductive and medical history, as well as current use of contraception was retrieved. The time of intrauterine device (IUD) insertion before ectopic pregnancy and the numbers of sold LNG-IUS during the study period were used to calculate the incidence rate for ectopic pregnancy during use per 100 woman-years (Pearl Index). Among women with an ectopic pregnancy diagnosis, 105 presented with a known type of hormonal IUD in situ, of whom 94 were included in the calculations of the Pearl Index. The estimated Pearl Index for ectopic pregnancy was 0.136 (95% CI 0.106-0.176) for the LNG-IUS 13.5-mg, 0.037 (95% CI 0.021-0.067) for the LNG-IUS 19.5-mg, and 0.009 (95% CI 0.006-0.014) for the LNG-IUS 52-mg. With the 52-mg LNG-IUS as referent, the relative risk (RR) for ectopic pregnancy was higher during the first year for LNG 13.5-mg (RR 20.59, 95% CI 12.04-35.21), and for both 13.5-mg (RR 14.49, 95% CI 9.01-23.3) and 19.5-mg (RR 4.44, 95% CI 1.64-12.00) during the total study period. The absolute risk of ectopic pregnancy during the use of LNG-IUS at any doses was low. The results show that the lower the dose of the IUD, the higher the risk of an ectopic pregnancy. Higher-dose LNG-IUS should be considered when providing contraceptive counseling to a woman with known risk factors for ectopic pregnancy who are considering a hormonal IUD.