Efficacy and Safety of Dienogest in the Management of Women with Endometriosis; Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ali A. Morsi, Nancy A. Ahmad, W. Amer
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Dienogest in the Management of Women with Endometriosis; Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Ali A. Morsi, Nancy A. Ahmad, W. Amer","doi":"10.21608/ebwhj.2023.196654.1237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Endometriosis is a sex hormone-dependent disease in which the uterine glands are out of the endometrial cavity. It affects about 10.8%–18.6% of women in the childbearing period. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Quality assessment was evaluated according to GRADE. Clinical trials were assessed according to Cochrane’s risk of bias tool. We included the following outcomes: Vas score for Pelvic pain, Bleeding or spotting, Adverse events, Physical health, Number of bleeding or spotting episodes, and Duration of bleeding or spotting episodes. We analyzed continuous data using mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous data were analyzed using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI Results: Five studies met the eligibility criteria for our meta-analysis. We found that dienogest was statistically better than placebo in terms of Vas score for Pelvic pain (MD=-26.68 [-40.74, -12.61], (P = 0.002), and physical health (MD=3.68 [2.40, 4.96], ( P < 0.001), While placebo was better than dienogest regarding bleeding (RR=2.46 [1.65, 3.68], ( P < 0.001), and adverse events (RR=1.19 [1.00, 1.42], (P = 0.04). There was no significant difference between both groups regarding number of bleeding or spotting episodes (MD=-0.51 [-1.10, 0.07], (P = 0.09), and duration of bleeding or spotting episodes (MD=8.69 [-0.84, 18.22], (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Our results prove that dienogest is well tolerated and effective in the management of pelvic pain related to endometriosis","PeriodicalId":12080,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Women's Health Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Women's Health Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/ebwhj.2023.196654.1237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Endometriosis is a sex hormone-dependent disease in which the uterine glands are out of the endometrial cavity. It affects about 10.8%–18.6% of women in the childbearing period. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Quality assessment was evaluated according to GRADE. Clinical trials were assessed according to Cochrane’s risk of bias tool. We included the following outcomes: Vas score for Pelvic pain, Bleeding or spotting, Adverse events, Physical health, Number of bleeding or spotting episodes, and Duration of bleeding or spotting episodes. We analyzed continuous data using mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), while dichotomous data were analyzed using odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI Results: Five studies met the eligibility criteria for our meta-analysis. We found that dienogest was statistically better than placebo in terms of Vas score for Pelvic pain (MD=-26.68 [-40.74, -12.61], (P = 0.002), and physical health (MD=3.68 [2.40, 4.96], ( P < 0.001), While placebo was better than dienogest regarding bleeding (RR=2.46 [1.65, 3.68], ( P < 0.001), and adverse events (RR=1.19 [1.00, 1.42], (P = 0.04). There was no significant difference between both groups regarding number of bleeding or spotting episodes (MD=-0.51 [-1.10, 0.07], (P = 0.09), and duration of bleeding or spotting episodes (MD=8.69 [-0.84, 18.22], (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Our results prove that dienogest is well tolerated and effective in the management of pelvic pain related to endometriosis
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dienogest治疗子宫内膜异位症的疗效和安全性系统评价与元分析
简介:子宫内膜异位症是一种性激素依赖性疾病,其子宫腺位于子宫内膜腔外。约10.8%-18.6%的育龄妇女患有此病。方法:我们检索PubMed、Cochrane CENTRAL、SCOPUS和Web of Science,查找随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的研究。质量评价按GRADE进行评价。根据Cochrane偏倚风险工具对临床试验进行评估。我们纳入了以下结果:盆腔疼痛、出血或点滴的Vas评分、不良事件、身体健康、出血或点滴发作次数、出血或点滴发作持续时间。我们使用平均差(MD)和95%置信区间(CI)分析连续数据,使用比值比(OR)和95% CI分析二分类数据。结果:5项研究符合我们meta分析的资格标准。我们发现,在盆腔疼痛(MD=-26.68 [-40.74, -12.61], (P = 0.002)和身体健康(MD=3.68 [2.40, 4.96], (P < 0.001)方面,地诺孕素在统计学上优于安慰剂,而在出血(RR=2.46 [1.65, 3.68], (P < 0.001)和不良事件(RR=1.19 [1.00, 1.42], (P = 0.04)方面,安慰剂优于地诺孕素。两组患者出血或点滴发作次数(MD=-0.51 [-1.10, 0.07], P = 0.09)和出血或点滴发作持续时间(MD=8.69 [-0.84, 18.22], P = 0.07)差异无统计学意义。结论:我们的研究结果证明,dienogest在治疗子宫内膜异位症相关盆腔疼痛方面具有良好的耐受性和有效性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Nuchal translucency in pregnant women beyond 35 years and its relation to congenital cardiac abnormalities: A cross-section study Histopathological evaluation of products of conception in sporadic and recurrent abortions The Effect of Adding Vaginal Progesterone to Oral Omega-3 Fatty Acids on the Birth Weight of Constitutionally Small for Gestational Age Fetuses: A Randomized Clinical Trial Efficacy and Safety of Paracervical Block in Reducing Intrauterine Device Insertion Related Pain : A Randomized Controlled Trial Study of the Changes of Pulsatility Index (PI) in Uterine Artery in Patients with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1