Marina de Paula Andres1, Livia Alves Lopes, Edmund Chada Baracat, Sergio Podgaec. 1. Endometriosis Clinic, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMUSP), Av. Dr Enéas de Carvalho Aguiar, 255, Cerqueira César, São Paulo, CEP, 05403-010, Brazil, marina.dpandres@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Endometriosis is a prevalent disease that affects 5-15 % of women of reproductive age. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of dienogest in the treatment of endometriosis. METHODS: The search was applied to electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Lilacs until September 2014, in a public tertiary hospital. We performed a systematic literature search of randomized trials comparing dienogest to other medical therapies in the treatment of endometriosis, as well as their references list, using the keywords "dienogest" and "endometriosis" by two independent authors. The data extraction were performed by two authors using predefined data fields. Nine randomized trials were included. Dienogest 2 mg/day was superior to placebo in reducing pelvic pain (27.4 versus 15.1 mm, P < 0.0001), with similar results to buserelin, leuprorelin, leuprolide acetate and triptorelin, in controlling symptoms associated with endometriosis. Dienogest 2 mg/day was effective in reducing endometriotic lesions (11.4 ± 1.71-3.6 ± 0.95, P < 0.001). The extended therapy with dienogest 2 mg/day also showed an improvement in pelvic pain after 24-52 weeks (-22.5 ± 32.1 and -28.4 ± 29.9 mm, respectively) with tolerable side effects. CONCLUSION: Dienogest should be considered as an alternative for controlling symptoms related to endometriosis. Nevertheless, in this systematic review, no studies were found comparing dienogest with first-line therapy, such as progestins and estrogen-progestogen combinations, which are proved to be effective in the treatment of endometriosis, are less expensive, and also can be used for contraception.
PURPOSE:Endometriosis is a prevalent disease that affects 5-15 % of women of reproductive age. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of dienogest in the treatment of endometriosis. METHODS: The search was applied to electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Lilacs until September 2014, in a public tertiary hospital. We performed a systematic literature search of randomized trials comparing dienogest to other medical therapies in the treatment of endometriosis, as well as their references list, using the keywords "dienogest" and "endometriosis" by two independent authors. The data extraction were performed by two authors using predefined data fields. Nine randomized trials were included. Dienogest 2 mg/day was superior to placebo in reducing pelvic pain (27.4 versus 15.1 mm, P < 0.0001), with similar results to buserelin, leuprorelin, leuprolide acetate and triptorelin, in controlling symptoms associated with endometriosis. Dienogest 2 mg/day was effective in reducing endometriotic lesions (11.4 ± 1.71-3.6 ± 0.95, P < 0.001). The extended therapy with dienogest 2 mg/day also showed an improvement in pelvic pain after 24-52 weeks (-22.5 ± 32.1 and -28.4 ± 29.9 mm, respectively) with tolerable side effects. CONCLUSION: Dienogest should be considered as an alternative for controlling symptoms related to endometriosis. Nevertheless, in this systematic review, no studies were found comparing dienogest with first-line therapy, such as progestins and estrogen-progestogen combinations, which are proved to be effective in the treatment of endometriosis, are less expensive, and also can be used for contraception.
Authors: Alexis D Greene; Stephanie A Lang; Jessica A Kendziorski; Julie M Sroga-Rios; Thomas J Herzog; Katherine A Burns Journal: Reproduction Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 3.906
Authors: Giovanni Grandi; Michael Mueller; Nick A Bersinger; Angelo Cagnacci; Annibale Volpe; Brett McKinnon Journal: Inflamm Res Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 4.575
Authors: Kumaravel Mohankumar; Xi Li; Nuri Sung; Yeon Jean Cho; Sang Jun Han; Stephen Safe Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: T Indrielle-Kelly; F Frühauf; M Fanta; A Burgetova; D Lavu; P Dundr; D Cibula; D Fischerova Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 3.411