RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal infiltrating and fibrotic endometriosis, also known as deep endometriosis, is the most severe manifestation of the disease that can cause severe complications including bowel and ureteral stenosis. The natural history of these lesions and the possible effect of hormonal treatments on their progression are undefined. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether and how frequently deep endometriosis progresses over time without or with ovarian suppression. This could inform management decisions in asymptomatic and mildly symptomatic patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: For this pre-registered systematic review (CRD42023463518), the PubMed and Embase databases were screened, and studies published between 2000 and 2023 that serially evaluated the size of deep endometriotic lesions without or with hormonal treatment were selected. Data on the progression, stability, or regression of deep endometriotic lesions were recorded as absolute frequencies or mean volume variations. Estimates of the overall percentage of progression and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random-effect model. When studies reported lesion progression as pre- and post-treatment volume means, the delta of the two-volume means was calculated and analyzed using the inverse variance method. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies were identified, of which 19 studies with 285 untreated and 730 treated patients were ultimately selected for meta-analysis. The overall estimate of the percentage of lesion progression in untreated individuals was 21.4% (95% CI, 6.8-40.8%; I2 = 90.5%), whereas it was 12.4% during various hormonal treatments (95% CI, 9.0-16.1%; I2 = 0%). Based on the overall meta-analysis estimates, the odds ratio of progression in treated versus untreated patients was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41-0.66). During hormonal suppression, the mean volume of deep endometriotic lesions decreased significantly by 0.87 cm3 (95% CI, 0.19-1.56 cm3; I2 = 0%), representing -28.5% of the baseline volume. CONCLUSIONS: Untreated deep endometriotic lesions progressed in about one in five patients. Medical therapy reduced but did not eliminate this risk. Given the organ function failure potentially caused by these lesions, the decision whether to use hormonal treatments in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic women should always be shared, carefully weighing the potential benefits and harms of the two alternatives after extensive counseling.
RESUMO
According to consistent epidemiological data, the slope of the incidence curve of endometriosis rises rapidly and sharply around the age of 25 years. The delay in diagnosis is generally reported to be between 5 and 8 years in adult women, but it appears to be over 10 years in adolescents. If this is true, the actual onset of endometriosis in many young women would be chronologically placed in the early postmenarchal years. Ovulation and menstruation are inflammatory events that, when occurring repeatedly for years, may theoretically favour the early development of endometriosis and adenomyosis. Moreover, repeated acute dysmenorrhoea episodes after menarche may not only be an indicator of ensuing endometriosis or adenomyosis, but may also promote the transition from acute to chronic pelvic pain through central sensitization mechanisms, as well as the onset of chronic overlapping pain conditions. Therefore, secondary prevention aimed at reducing suffering, limiting lesion progression, and preserving future reproductive potential should be focused on the age group that could benefit most from the intervention, i.e. severely symptomatic adolescents. Early-onset endometriosis and adenomyosis should be promptly suspected even when physical and ultrasound findings are negative, and long-term ovulatory suppression may be established until conception seeking. As nowadays this could mean using hormonal therapies for several years, drug safety evaluation is crucial. In adolescents without recognized major contraindications to oestrogens, the use of very low-dose combined oral contraceptives is associated with a marginal increase in the individual absolute risk of thromboembolic events. Oral contraceptives containing oestradiol instead of ethinyl oestradiol may further limit such risk. Oral, subcutaneous, and intramuscular progestogens do not increase the thromboembolic risk, but may interfere with attainment of peak bone mass in young women. Levonorgestrel-releasing intra-uterine devices may be a safe alternative for adolescents, as amenorrhoea is frequently induced without suppression of the ovarian activity. With regard to oncological risk, the net effect of long-term oestrogen-progestogen combinations use is a small reduction in overall cancer risk. Whether surgery should be considered the first-line approach in young women with chronic pelvic pain symptoms seems questionable. Especially when large endometriomas or infiltrating lesions are not detected at pelvic imaging, laparoscopy should be reserved to adolescents who refuse hormonal treatments or in whom first-line medications are not effective, not tolerated, or contraindicated. Diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms, including self-reported outcome measures, for young individuals with a clinical suspicion of early-onset endometriosis or adenomyosis are proposed.
