ReviewPain reports2025
Efficacy and safety of drug combinations for chronic pelvic pain: a systematic review.
Review in Pain reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of Cognitive Behavior Therapy, Pelvic Floor Therapy, Integrated Therapy, and Pharmacotherapy in the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain in Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Troxerutin suppresses the stemness of hepatocellular carcinoma via the Syk/FOXO3 feedback loop.Cell biology and toxicology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical disorders associated with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) cause demonstrable emotional and physical dysfunction as well as increased health care utilization. Interventions that have been studied for the treatment of CPP often provide inadequate relief and/or intolerable adverse effects. The common practice of combining multiple CPP treatments needs more supportive evidence, and emerging combination trials have been evaluated in this systematic review. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE and CENTRAL databases for CPP combination trials. This review included double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing combinations of 2 or more agents to at least 1 monotherapy in adults with CPP. The primary outcome was reduction in pain intensity or pain relief, and secondary outcomes included adverse events, quality of life, and other symptoms. Risk of bias was assessed. Nine studies (1,299 participants) were included and involved various different treatments including ciprofloxacin, tamsulosin, pentosan polysulfate, hyaluronic acid, chondroitin, hydroxyzine, troxerutin, carbazochrome, linzagolix, and allopurinol. Studies were heterogenous according to several features including studied treatments, dose and route of administration, and underlying condition such that no studies could be combined for meta-analysis. None of the included studies reported a significant difference in reducing pain intensity for combination therapy vs monotherapy. If future proof-of-concept studies demonstrate that a given combination is superior to all monotherapy components, subsequent large, double-blind randomized, controlled clinical trials of such combinations for CPP are required to better elucidate the role of combination therapy in clinical settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.