Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP-
dc.contributor.authorVERCELLINI, Paolo-
dc.contributor.authorGIUDICE, Linda C.-
dc.contributor.authorEVERS, Johannes L. H.-
dc.contributor.authorABRAO, Mauricio S.-
dc.identifier.citationHUMAN REPRODUCTION, v.30, n.9, p.1996-2004, 2015-
dc.description.abstractQuantification of benefits and harms of medical interventions should be based on high-quality evidence, which is not always the case in the endometriosis field. In many clinical circumstances, healthcare decisions in women with endometriosis are taken based on suboptimal evidence or on evidence of coexistence of benefits and harms that must be balanced. In these conditions, it is important to avoid or reduce the use of low-value care, i.e. interventions with defined harms and uncertain benefits, or whose effectiveness is comparable with less expensive alternatives. In particular, we suggest that: (i) non-surgical diagnosis based on symptoms, physical findings and transvaginal ultrasonography is possible in most women with symptomatic endometriosis. Thus, except in doubtful cases, laparoscopy should be intended for surgical treatment, not for diagnostic purposes: early diagnosis and diagnostic laparoscopy are not synonymous; (ii) future trials on new drugs for endometriosis should address those outcomes that are most important to patients, should be designed as superiority trials and should include a progestin or an estrogen-progestin as a comparator. Moreover, limitation of repetitive surgery for recurrent endometriosis is among the objectives of long-term medical treatment; (iii) indications for surgery should be the result of a balance between demonstrated benefits in terms of fertility enhancement and pain relief, specific risks associated with excision of different types of endometriotic lesions, cost-effectiveness and patient preference after detailed information; (iv) physicians, health professionals and policy makers should discriminate between screening for and diagnosis of endometriosis. Limited peritoneal foci, which are frequently observed also in asymptomatic women, regress or remain stable in about two thirds of cases. Therefore, the theoretical premises for a screening campaign are currently unclear; (v) physicians should develop the ability to effectively communicate quantitative information based on international guidelines and systematic literature reviews. This will assist a woman's understanding of the interaction between the evidence and her priorities, facilitating the transition towards value-based medicine.-
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institutes of Health-
dc.publisherOXFORD UNIV PRESS-
dc.relation.ispartofHuman Reproduction-
dc.subjectpelvic pain-
dc.subjectpatient-centred medicine-
dc.subjectlow-value care-
dc.subject.otherchronic pelvic pain-
dc.subject.othernoninvasive diagnosis-
dc.subject.otherprogressive disease-
dc.subject.othermild endometriosis-
dc.subject.otherasymptomatic women-
dc.subject.otherinfertile women-
dc.titleReducing low-value care in endometriosis between limited evidence and unresolved issues: a proposal-
dc.rights.holderCopyright OXFORD UNIV PRESS-
dc.subject.wosObstetrics & Gynecology-
dc.subject.wosReproductive Biology-
dc.type.categoryoriginal article-
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion-, Paolo:Univ Milan, Ist Ostetr & Ginecol Luigi Mangiagalli, Dept Womens & Childrens Hlth, I-20122 Milan, Italy; Fdn IRCCS Ca Granda Osped Maggiore Policlin, I-20122 Milan, Italy-, Linda C.:Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Div Reprod Endocrinol & Infertil, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA-, Johannes L. H.:Maastricht Univ, Div Reprod Endocrinol & Fertil, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Med Ctr, Maastricht, Netherlands-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAbrao MS, 2015, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V21, P329, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmv003-
hcfmusp.relation.referencePfeifer S, 2014, FERTIL STERIL, V101, P927, DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.02.012-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGuo SW, 2009, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V15, P441, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmp007-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLIU DTY, 1986, BRIT J OBSTET GYNAEC, V93, P859, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1986.tb07995.x-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVercellini P, 2009, HUM REPROD, V24, P254, DOI 10.1093/humrep/den379-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVercellini P, 2014, NAT REV ENDOCRINOL, V10, P261, DOI 10.1038/nrendo.2013.255-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMay KE, 2010, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V16, P651, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmq009-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceModugno F, 2004, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V191, P733, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.035-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAndrews JC, 2013, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V66, P726, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.003-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceStratton P, 2011, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V17, P327, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmq050-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMoore J, 2002, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V20, P630, DOI 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2002.00862.x-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBalshem H, 2011, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V64, P401, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015-
hcfmusp.relation.referencede Ziegler D, 2010, LANCET, V376, P730, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60490-4-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDe Cicco C, 2011, BJOG-INT J OBSTET GY, V118, P285, DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02744.x-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBarbosa CP, 2009, SAO PAULO MED J, V127, P342, DOI 10.1590/S1516-31802009000600004-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBalasch J, 1996, HUM REPROD, V11, P387-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGuo SW, 2013, OBSTET GYNECOL, V121, P1281, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318291f299-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRaffi F, 2012, J CLIN ENDOCR METAB, V97, P3146, DOI 10.1210/jc.2012-1558-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRogers PAW, 2013, REPROD SCI, V20, P483, DOI 10.1177/1933719113477495-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGiudice LC, 2010, NEW ENGL J MED, V362, P2389, DOI 10.1056/NEJMcp1000274-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMAHMOOD TA, 1991, HUM REPROD, V6, P544-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVercellini P, 2009, HUM REPROD UPDATE, V15, P177, DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmn062-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceHarada T, 2008, FERTIL STERIL, V90, P1583, DOI 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.08.051-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAndrews J, 2013, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V66, P719, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.013-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceColla CH, 2014, NEW ENGL J MED, V371, P1280, DOI 10.1056/NEJMp1404503-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceJohnson NP, 2013, HUM REPROD, V28, P1552, DOI 10.1093/humrep/det050-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceHudelist G, 2011, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V37, P257, DOI 10.1002/uog.8858-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceParazzini F, 1999, HUM REPROD, V14, P1332-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBrown J, 2014, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V3-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDunselman GAJ, 2014, HUM REPROD, V29, P400, DOI 10.1093/humrep/det457-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEskenazi B, 2001, FERTIL STERIL, V76, P929, DOI 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02736-4-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEvers JLH, 2013, HUM REPROD, V28, P2023, DOI 10.1093/humrep/det298-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFedele L, 2004, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V191, P1539, DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.104-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceHickey M, 2014, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V348, DOI 10.1136/bmj.g1752-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceHolt VL, 2000, EPIDEMIOLOGY, V11, P654, DOI 10.1097/00001648-200011000-00007-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKIRSHON B, 1989, J REPROD MED, V34, P215-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKorenstein D, 2015, JAMA INTERN MED, V175, P287, DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6744-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKRESCH AJ, 1984, OBSTET GYNECOL, V64, P672-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLeFevre ML, 2013, JAMA INTERN MED, V173, P856, DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.535-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLeyland Nicholas, 2010, J Obstet Gynaecol Can, V32, pS1-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLing FW, 1999, OBSTET GYNECOL, V93, P51, DOI 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00341-X-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMarcoux S, 1997, NEW ENGL J MED, V337, P217, DOI 10.1056/NEJM199707243370401-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMay C, 2009, BRIT MED J, V339, DOI 10.1136/bmj.b2803-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMOEN MH, 1987, ACTA OBSTET GYN SCAN, V66, P451, DOI 10.3109/00016348709022053-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMoen MH, 2002, FERTIL STERIL, V78, P773, DOI 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03336-8-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMOEN MH, 1991, HUM REPROD, V6, P699-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRAWSON JMR, 1991, J REPROD MED, V36, P513-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSANGIHAGHPEYKAR H, 1995, OBSTET GYNECOL, V85, P983, DOI 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00074-2-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSchroeder SA, 2013, NEW ENGL J MED, V368, P2029, DOI 10.1056/NEJMsb1302322-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSchunemann HJ, 2008, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V336, P1106, DOI 10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.AE-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSeracchioli R, 2009, HUM REPROD, V24, P2729, DOI 10.1093/humrep/dep259-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSomigliana E, 2010, HUM REPROD, V25, P1863, DOI 10.1093/humrep/deq141-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSteege JF, 2014, OBSTET GYNECOL, V123, P1, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000072-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTamaresis JS, 2014, ENDOCRINOLOGY, V155, P4986, DOI 10.1210/en.2014-1490-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceThe American College ofObstetricians and Gynecologists, 2010, OBSTET GYNECOL, V116, P223-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTRIMBOS JB, 1990, ARCH GYNECOL OBSTET, V247, P121, DOI 10.1007/BF02390859-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVercellini P, 2013, ACTA OBSTET GYN SCAN, V92, P8, DOI 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01470.x-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVercellini P, 2011, HUM REPROD, V26, P3, DOI 10.1093/humrep/deq302-
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWright JD, 2014, OBSTET GYNECOL, V124, P886, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000483-
Appears in Collections:

Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MOG
Departamento de Obstetrícia e Ginecologia - FM/MOG

Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/58
LIM/58 - Laboratório de Ginecologia Estrutural e Molecular

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
  Restricted Access
publishedVersion (English)202.09 kBAdobe PDFView/Open Request a copy

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.