Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35037089›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2022

Evaluation of pharmacological interventions in the management of adenomyosis: a systematic review.

Kiran Kumar Rathinam, Justin Jacob Abraham, Heema Preethy S, Shevaani S A, Maitrayee Sen, Melvin George, Priyadharshini A

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Reduced vagal tone in women with adenomyosis.Reproduction & fertility · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kiran Kumar RathinamDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
Justin Jacob AbrahamDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
Heema Preethy SDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
Shevaani S ADepartment of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
Maitrayee SenDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital & Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
Melvin GeorgeDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, SRM Medical College Hospital & Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7101-8513
Priyadharshini ADepartment of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Tamil Nadu, Kattankulathur, 603 203, India.
SRM Institute of Science and Technology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMedical management of adenomyosis largely revolves around symptom management, with very few drugs having received regulatory approval for the disease. However, the level of evidence supporting the use of pharmacological interventions is low, making it difficult to establish their efficacy in the treatment of adenomyosis. Hence, the aim of our systematic review is to identify the strength of evidence currently available and evaluate the effectiveness of different medical interventions in the management of adenomyosis.

methodsThe search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov. Articles published between 1 January 2010 and 30 November 2020 were considered. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies that assessed the efficacy of medical interventions in patients with adenomyosis were included. The quality of the data was analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software.

resultsLNG-IUS (levonorgestrel intrauterine system), dienogest and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues were effective in reducing pain, uterine volume and menstrual bleeding. However, these data were largely obtained in the non-trial setting and were fraught with issues that included patient selection, short duration of therapy, small sample size, and limited long-term safety and effectiveness data.

conclusionsAlthough LNG-IUS, dienogest and GnRH analogues have better evidence for effectiveness in adenomyosis, the need of the hour is to thoroughly evaluate other novel molecules for adenomyosis using well-designed randomized controlled trials.

Indexed as

AdenomyosisIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedFemaleHumansLevonorgestrelLevonorgestrelAdenomyosisDysmenorrheaGnRH analoguesLevonorgestrel-IUSMedical therapyPBACProgestinsUterine volume

Identifiers

PMID35037089
OpenAlexW4205655443

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.