Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16235288›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea.

M L Proctor, P M Latthe, C M Farquhar, K S Khan, N P Johnson

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 176 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for dysmenorrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists for dysmenorrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Management of dysmenorrhea through yoga: A narrative review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Endometriosis Pain Management: a Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Surgery and Endometriosis.Clinical obstetrics and gynecology · 2017
    Article
  17. Article
  18. A review of in vitro and in vivo studies on the efficacy of herbal medicines for primary dysmenorrhea.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2014
    Review
  19. Systematic review of randomized clinical trials of acupressure therapy for primary dysmenorrhea.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2013
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M L ProctorDepartment of Corrections, Psychological Service, PO Box 302 457, North Harbour, Auckland, New Zealand 1310. michelle.proctor@woosh.co.nz
P M Latthe
C M Farquhar
K S Khan
N P Johnson
Birmingham Women's Hospital · GBUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDysmenorrhoea is the occurrence of painful menstrual cramps of uterine origin and is a very common gynaecological complaint with negative effect on a sufferer's quality of life. Medical therapy for dysmenorrhoea includes oral contraceptive pills (OCP) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) which both act by suppressing prostaglandin levels. While these treatments are very successful there is still a 20 to 25% failure rate and surgery has been an option for such cases. Uterine nerve ablation (UNA) and presacral neurectomy (PSN) are two surgical treatments that have become increasingly utilised in recent years due to advances in laparoscopic procedures. These procedures both interrupt the majority of the cervical sensory pain nerve fibres. Observational studies have supported the use of these procedures for primary dysmenorrhoea. However, both operations only partially interrupt the cervical sensory nerve fibres in the pelvic area and, therefore, this type of surgery may not always benefit women with dysmenorrhoea.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways as treatment for primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea, and to determine the most effective surgical treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched 9 June 2004), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to Nov 2003), EMBASE (1980 to Nov 2003), and CINAHL (1982 to Oct 2003). Attempts were also made to identify trials from the metaRegister of Controlled Trials and the citation lists of review articles and included trials. In most cases the first or corresponding author of each included trial was contacted for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria were randomised comparisons of surgical techniques of interruption of the pelvic nerve pathways (using both open and laparoscopic procedures) for the treatment of primary and secondary dysmenorrhoea. The main outcome measures were pain relief and adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eleven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified that initially appeared to fulfil the inclusion criteria for this review. Two trials were subsequently excluded (Garcia Leon 2003; Sutton 1991). Of the remaining nine trials, eight were included in the meta-analysis. The results of one trial were included in the text of the review for discussion because the data were not available in a form that allowed them to be combined in the meta-analysis. Five trials investigated laparoscopic uterine nerve ablation (LUNA), two trials laparoscopic presacral neurectomy (LPSN) and two open presacral neurectomy (PSN). MAIN

resultsFor the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea there was some evidence of the effectiveness of laparoscopic uterine nerve ablation (LUNA) when compared to a control or no treatment. The comparison between LUNA and laparoscopic presacral neurectomy (LPSN) for primary dysmenorrhoea showed no significant difference in pain relief in the short term; however, long-term LPSN was shown to be significantly more effective than LUNA. For the treatment of secondary dysmenorrhoea six identified RCTs addressed endometriosis and one included women with uterine myomas. The treatment of LUNA combined with surgical treatment of endometrial implants versus surgical treatment of endometriosis alone showed that the addition of LUNA did not aid pain relief. For PSN combined with endometriosis treatment versus endometriosis treatment alone there was an overall difference in pain relief although the data suggests this may be specific to laparoscopy and for midline abdominal pain only. Adverse events were significantly more common for presacral neurectomy; however, the majority were complications such as constipation, which may spontaneously improve. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of nerve interruption in the management of dysmenorrhoea, regardless of cause. Future methodologically sound and sufficiently powered RCTs should be undertaken.

Indexed as

AdultDenervationDysmenorrheaFemaleHumansLaparoscopyPelvisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSacrococcygeal RegionUterus

Identifiers

PMID16235288
PMCPMC8982518
OpenAlexW2096691338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.