Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access first published online on March 24, 2005
This version published online on May 26, 2005
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/deh869
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/7/1993    most recent
deh869v2
deh869v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Petta, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Bahamondes, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Petta, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Bahamondes, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org
Received October 21, 2004
Revised February 15, 2005
Accepted February 23, 2005

Article

Randomized clinical trial of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and a depot GnRH analogue for the treatment of chronic pelvic pain in women with endometriosis

Carlos A. Petta 1*, Rui A. Ferriani 2, Mauricio S. Abrao 3, Daniela Hassan 1, Julio C. Rosa e Silva 2, Sergio Podgaec 3, and Luis Bahamondes 1

1 Human Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP-RP), Ribeirão Preto, Brazil
3 Endometriosis Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Medicine, Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP-SP), São Paulo, Brazil

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Carlos A. Petta, E-mail: cpetta{at}attglobal.net


  Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this multicentre randomized, controlled clinical trial was to compare the efficacy of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and a depot-GnRH-analogue in the control of endometriosis-related pain over a period of six months. METHODS: Eighty-two women, 18 to 40 years of age (mean 30 years), with endometriosis, dysmenorrhoea and/or CPP, were randomized using a computer-generated system of sealed envelopes into either LNG-IUS (n=39) or GnRH analogue (n=43) treatment groups at three university centres. Daily scores of endometriosis-associated CPP were evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), daily bleeding score was calculated from bleeding calendars, and improvement in quality of life was evaluated using the Psychological General Well-Being Index Questionnaire (PGWBI). The pain score diary was based on the VAS in which women recorded the occurrence and intensity of pain on a daily basis. A monthly score was calculated from the result of the sum of the daily scores divided by the number of days in each observation period. RESULTS: CPP decreased significantly from the first month throughout the six months of therapy with both forms of treatment and there was no difference between the groups (P>0.999). In both treatment groups, women with stage III and IV endometriosis showed a more rapid improvement in the VAS pain score than women with stage I and II of the disease (P<0.002). LNG-IUS users had a higher bleeding score than GnRH-analogue users at all time points of observation with 34% and 71% of patients in the LNG-IUS and GnRH-analogue groups, respectively, reporting no bleeding during the first treatment month, and 70% and 98% reporting no bleeding during the sixth month. No difference was observed between groups with reference to improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Both, the LNG-IUS and the GnRH-analogue were effective in the treatment of CPP-associated endometriosis, although no differences were observed between the two treatments. Among the additional advantages of the LNG-IUS is the fact that it does not provoke hypoestrogenism and that it requires only one medical intervention for its introduction every 5 years. This device could therefore become the treatment of choice for CPP-associated endometriosis in women who do not wish to conceive.

Keywords: endometriosis; GnRH analogue; intrauterine levonorgestrel; pain.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M.K.O. Gomes, J.C. Rosa-e-Silva, S.B. Garcia, A.C. J. de Sa Rosa-e-Silva, A. Turatti, C.S. Vieira, and R.A. Ferriani
Effects of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on cell proliferation, Fas expression and steroid receptors in endometriosis lesions and normal endometrium
Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2009; 24(11): 2736 - 2745.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group
Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems
Hum. Reprod. Update, May 1, 2008; 14(3): 197 - 208.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
C. Farquhar
Endometriosis
BMJ, February 3, 2007; 334(7587): 249 - 253.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
L. Bahamondes, X. Espejo-Arce, M. M. Hidalgo, C. Hidalgo-Regina, C. Teatin-Juliato, and C. A. Petta
A cross-sectional study of the forearm bone density of long-term users of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1316 - 1319.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
A. Peloggia, C. A. Petta, L. Bahamondes, M. Oliveira-Ribeiro, J. Zhang, and L. Salamonsen
Endometrial chemokines, uterine natural killer cells and mast cells in long-term users of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2006; 21(5): 1129 - 1134.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.