Deep endometriosis infiltrating the recto-sigmoid: critical factors to consider before management

Mauricio Simoes Abrao1,, Felice Petraglia2, Tommaso Falcone3, Joerg Keckstein4, Yutaka Osuga5, and Charles Chapron6,7,8 Endometriosis Division, Obstetrics and Gynecological Department – Sao Paulo University, Sao Paulo, Brazil Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Molecular and Developmental Medicine, University of Siena, Siena, Italy Obstetrics, Gynecology andWomen's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Endometriosis, Villach Hospital, Villach, Austria Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo, Tokyo, Japan Universite Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cite, Faculte de Medecine, Assistance Publique – Hopitaux de Paris (APHP), Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire (GHU) Ouest, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Department of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine, 75679 Paris, France Institut Cochin, Universite Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cite CNRS (UMR 8104), Paris, France Inserm, Universite Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cite, Unite de recherche U1016, Paris, Franc

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis—part 1: ovarian endometrioma

Study question: What does this document on the surgical treatment of endometriosis jointly prepared by the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), ESHRE, and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) provide? / Summary answer: This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for endometriomas in women of reproductive age. / What is already known: Endometriomas (ovarian endometriotic cysts) are a commonly diagnosed form of endometriosis, owing to the relative ease and accuracy of ultrasound diagnosis. They frequently present a clinical dilemma as to whether and how to treat them when found during imaging or incidentally during surgery. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations based on the best available evidence, but without technical details on the management of endometriosis. / Study design, size and duration: A working group of ESGE, ESHRE and WES collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of endometrioma surgery. / Participants/materials, setting and methods: This document focused on endometrioma surgery. Further documents in this series will provide recommendations for surgery of deep and peritoneal endometriosis. / Main results and the role of chance: The document presents general recommendations for surgery of endometrioma and specific recommendations for cystectomy, ablation by laser or by plasma energy, electrocoagulation and a combination of these techniques applied together or with an interval between them. / Limitations and reasons for caution: Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. / Wider implications of the findings: These recommendations complement previous guidelines on the management of endometriosis. / Study funding/competing interests: The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES. CB declares to be a member of the independent data monitoring committee for a clinical study by ObsEva and receiving research grants from Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, MDNA Life Sciences and Volition. ES received honoraria for provision of training to healthcare professionals from Ethicon, Olympus and Gedeon Richter. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

Recommendations for the surgical treatment of endometriosis. Part 2: deep endometriosis

Study question: How should surgery for endometriosis be performed? / Summary answer: This document provides recommendations covering technical aspects of different methods of surgery for deep endometriosis in women of reproductive age. / What is known already: Endometriosis is highly prevalent and often associated with severe symptoms. Yet compared to equally prevalent conditions it is poorly understood and a challenge to manage. Previously published guidelines have provided recommendations for (surgical) treatment of deep endometriosis, based on the best available evidence, but without technical information and details on how to best perform such treatment in order to be effective and safe. / Study, design, size, duration: A working group of the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and the World Endometriosis Society (WES) collaborated on writing recommendations on the practical aspects of surgery for treatment of deep endometriosis. / Participants, materials, setting, methods: This document focused on surgery for deep endometriosis, and is complementary to a previous document in this series focusing on endometrioma surgery. / Main results and the role of chance: The document presents general recommendations for surgery for deep endometriosis, starting from preoperative assessments and first steps of surgery. Different approaches for surgical treatment are discussed and are respective of location and extent of disease; uterosacral ligaments and rectovaginal septum with or without involvement of the rectum, urinary tract or extrapelvic endometriosis. In addition, recommendations are provided on the treatment of frozen pelvis and on hysterectomy as a treatment for deep endometriosis. / Limitations, reasons for caution: Owing to the limited evidence available, recommendations are mostly based on clinical expertise. Where available, references of relevant studies were added. / Wider implications of the findings: These recommendations complement previous guidelines on management of endometriosis and the recommendations for surgical treatment of ovarian endometrioma. / Study funding - Competing interest(s): The meetings of the working group were funded by ESGE, ESHRE and WES

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences

HybridAPC vs. Excision for Treatment of Endometriosis- a RCT

Study objective: Endometriosis is a benign but potentially serious gynaecological condition in terms of abdominal pain and impaired fertility. Laparoscopic excision techniques are considered the therapeutic standard. HybridAPC is presented as a novel technique for the non-contact thermal ablation of peritoneal endometriosis with simultaneous protection of the underlying thermosensitive structures by creating a needle-free elevated fluid cushion which enables a safer exposure and distance, as well as potentially improved peritoneal conditioning prior to APC. Design: Prospective, randomized, controlled, and single-blinded clinical study. Settings: Women's health department in a university hospital. Patients: 39 patients who presented with peritoneal endometriosis during a diagnostic laparoscopy and an indication for a second laparoscopy. Interventions: 132 superficial endometriotic lesions were treated with HybridAPC or sharp excision in an initial laparoscopic procedure according to randomization. In a second-look laparoscopy, adhesion formation was rated macroscopically. Histologic samples were taken from previously treated areas for evaluation of eradication rate

Validation of a computational model of a press using 3D measurement with elimination of manufacturing inaccuracies

This paper focuses on advanced measurement methodology and its evaluation with the validation of an FEM computational model. Using the methods described in this paper, it is possible to implement values from FEM computation to places that are difficult or impossible to measure. The methods and analyses are carried out on a hydraulic press with a working force of 4000 kN used for pressing acoustic and interior parts from fabrics. The methodologies are not only limited to hydraulic presses, but are also generally applicable to other machines

Physical methods for increasing press accuracy

This paper is focused on the design and use of less conventional and unconventional physical methods for achieving higher press accuracy. The methods are applied to three presses, and their contribution and possibilities for using them in practice are evaluated. The limitations, benefits, and options of their use are defined for each method. The generalized outputs are also applicable for other machines