Endometriosis-Associated Infertility. Clinical and Anamnestic Characteristics
https://doi.org/10.31550/1727-2378-2022-21-1-34-38
Abstract
Study Objective: To compare clinical and anamnestic characteristics of women with endometriosis-associated (EAI) and tuboperitoneal (TPI) infertility.
Study Design: Retrospective case–control study.
Materials and Methods. The study enrolled 300 patients: 150 women with histologically confirmed EAI formed group I (study group), and 150 women with TPI who formed group II (controls). All subjects underwent clinical, anthropometric and specialised pelvic examination, laparoscopy and hysteroscopy in accordance with commonly used methods. The revised classification developed by the American Fertility Society (R-AFS) was used to evaluate the endometriosis severity and adhesive process prevalence. Pain intensity was evaluated using a visual analogue scale. All patients with endometriosis had their minimal preserved function and Endometriosis Fertility Index (EFI) calculated.
Study Results. Patients with EAI were older that patients with TPI (31 vs 29 years old, p = 0.002); they more frequently had pelvic pain (41.3%), dysmenorrhea (29.3%), dyspareunea (31.3%), abnormal uterine bleedings (12.7%) were reported only by patients with EAI (р = 0.001 in all cases). Endometriosis in these patients was localised primarily on the pelvic peritoneum, uterine ligaments and ovaries. Endometriosis stage I–II was recorded in 57% of patients with EAI, stage III and IV — in 43%; and no relationship has been found between disease stage and clinical signs of the disease. The minimal mean preserved function in patients with EAI was 12.8 ± 5.6 points, EFI — 6.7 ± 2.6 points. Endometriosis was diagnosed and verified late, at an average of 3 years after onset of symptoms.
Conclusion. Patients with EAI had some peculiar clinical and anamnestic characteristics vs. patients with TPI. Despite the fact that endometriosis was diagnosed and verified at an average of 3 years after onset of symptoms, EFI shows that the efficiency of surgery for infertility management is quite high in this group of patients. Further studies are required to evaluate the need in and the timing of laparoscopy in this category of patients.
About the Authors
N. V. Artymuk
Kemerovo State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
22a Voroshilov Str., Kemerovo, 650029
L. N. Danilova
M.A. Podgorbunsky Kuzbass Clinical Emergency Care Hospital
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
22 Ostrovsky Str., Kemerovo, 650000
O. A. Tachkova
Kemerovo State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
22a Voroshilov Str., Kemerovo, 650029
References
1. Sarria-Santamera A., Orazumbekova B., Terzic M. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of incidence and prevalence of endometriosis. Healthcare (Basel). 2020; 9(1): 29. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare9010029
2. Bougie O., Yap M.I., Sikora L. et al. Influence of race/ethnicity on prevalence and presentation of endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2019; 126(9): 1104–15. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15692
3. Khine Y.M., Taniguchi F., Harada T. Clinical management of endometriosis-associated infertility. Reprod. Med. Biol. 2016; 15(4): 217–25. DOI: 10.1007/s12522-016-0237-9
4. Pantou A., Simopoulou M., Sfakianoudis K. et al. The role of laparoscopic investigation in enabling natural conception and avoiding in vitro fertilization overuse for infertile patients of unidentified aetiology and recurrent implantation failure following in vitro fertilization. J. Clin. Med. 2019; 8(4): 548. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8040548
5. Hwang H., Chung Y.-J., Lee S.R. et al. Clinical evaluation and management of endometriosis: guideline for Korean patients from Korean Society of Endometriosis. Obstet. Gynecol. Sci. 2018; 61(5): 553–64. DOI: 10.5468/ogs.2018.61.5.553
6. Artymuk N.V., Bezhenar V.F., Berlim Yu.D. et al.; Dubrovina S.O., Bezhenar V.F., eds. Endometriosis. Pathogenesis, diagnosis and management. M.: GEOTAR-Media; 2020. 352 p. (in Russian)
7. Mettler L., Alkatout I., Keckstein J. et al., eds. Endometriosis: a concise practical guide to current diagnosis and treatment. Endo Press GmbH; 2018. 480 p.
8. Hodgson R.M., Lee H.L., Wang R. et al. Interventions for endometriosis-related infertility: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril. 2020; 113(2): 374–82.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.09.031
9. Collinet P., Fritel X., Revel-Delhom C. et al. Management of endometriosis: CNGOF/HAS clinical practice guidelines — short version. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Hum. Reprod. 2018; 47(7): 265–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.06.003
10. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice and Practice Committee. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee Opinion No. 589. Fertil. Steril. 2014; 101(3): 633–4. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032
11. Dunselman G.A., Vermeulen N., Becker C. et al. ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum. Reprod. 2014; 29(3): 400–12. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/det457
12. Wang W., Li R., Fang T. et al. Endometriosis fertility index score maybe more accurate for predicting the outcomes of in vitro fertilisation than r-AFS classification in women with endometriosis. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2013; 11: 112. DOI: 10.1186/1477-7827-11-112
13. Hawker G.A., Mian S., Kendzerska T. et al. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), ShortForm McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res. (Hoboken). 2011; 63(11): 240–52. DOI: 10.1002/acr.20543
14. Munro M.G., Critchley H.O.D., Fraser I.S. et al. The two FIGO systems for normal and abnormal uterine bleeding symptoms and classification of causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in the reproductive years: 2018 revisions. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2018; 143(3): 393–408. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12666
15. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Diagnostic evaluation of the infertile female: a committee opinion. Fertil. Steril. 2015; 103(6): e44–50. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.03.019
16. Zotova O.A., Artymuk N.V. Adenomyosis: clinic, risk factors and problems of diagnosis and treatment. Gynecology. 2013; 6(15): 31–4. (in Russian)
17. Barbieri R.L. Why are there delays in the diagnosis of endometriosis? OBG Manag. 2017; 29(3): 8, 10, 11.
18. Meuleman C., Vandenabeele B., Fieuws S. et al. High prevalence of endometriosis in infertile women with normal ovulation and normospermic partners. Fertil. Steril. 2009; 92(1): 68–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.04.056
19. ETIC Endometriosis Treatment Italian Club. When more is not better: 10 'don'ts' in endometriosis management. An ETIC* position statement. Hum. Reprod. Open. 2019; 12(3): hoz009. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoz009
20. Tomassetti C., Bafort C., Meuleman C. et al. Reproducibility of the Endometriosis Fertility Index: a prospective inter-/intra-rater agreement study. BJOG. 2020; 127(1): 107–14. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.15880
Review
For citations:
Artymuk N.V., Danilova L.N., Tachkova O.A. Endometriosis-Associated Infertility. Clinical and Anamnestic Characteristics. Title. 2022;21(1):34-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31550/1727-2378-2022-21-1-34-38
Views:
10
Email this article 