SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Reproductive outcomes after fertility-sparing interventions for symptomatic adenomyosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uterine artery embolization for the treatment of symptomatic adenomyosis: a systematic review.CVIR endovascular · 2026Review
- Subtype-specific analysis of factors associated with assisted reproductive technology indication and live birth in patients with adenomyosis: a retrospective study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Clinical challenges and therapeutic strategies in women with endometriosis, deep infiltrating endometriosis, and/or adenomyosis undergoing assisted reproductive technologies: a narrative review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically review studies on reproductive outcomes following fertility-sparing interventions.
methodsVarious electronic databases were searched and studies reporting reproductive outcomes following fertility-sparing interventions for adenomyosis from January 2000 to July 2023 were included. The outcomes were presented as frequency with percentages, and the pooled proportions were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed if significant heterogeneity was present. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale quality assessment tool.
resultsA total of 32 articles comprising 2501 participants were included (no RCTs were identified and included). The pooled pregnancy rates were 50.1% (95% CI: 40.0-60.2%) and 52.0% (32.4-71.6%) after adenomyomectomy and image-guided thermal ablation, respectively. The delivery rates were 39.5% (29.9-49.2%) and 32.5% (26.0-38.9%) for adenomyomectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. The pregnancy loss rates were 19.8% (12.2-27.5%) and 39.5% (13.8-65.1%) for adenomyectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. The spontaneous miscarriage rates were 16.3% (9.7-22.9%) and 27.1% (8.1-46.1%) after adenomyomectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. The rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes were 21.4% (7.5-35.3%) and 1.0% (-1.6-3.7%) after adenomyomectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. The preterm delivery rates were 18.4% (2.9-33.9%) and 0.3% (-1.0-1.7%) for adenomyomectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. The IVF-ET conception rates were 40.5% (28.8-52.1%) after adenomyomectomy and 27.5% (-17.3-72.2%) after thermal ablation. The cesarean section rates were 99.6% (98.3-100.8%) and 44.6% (13.4-75.9%) after adenomyomectomy and thermal ablation, respectively. However, as only one article reporting the reproductive outcomes after UAE met the inclusion criteria, meta-analysis could not be performed for UAE.
conclusionThe reproductive outcomes following fertility-sparing interventions are promising for women with adenomyosis who desire fertility. However, limited available evidence, potential selection bias, and heterogeneity among the included articles are confounding factors that might influence the assessment of outcomes. REGISTRATION: This systematic review protocol was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (under identifier CRD42020199586) in August 2020.
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.