ArticleWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)
Exploring Short-Acting Hormonal Contraceptives in Endometriosis Care-A Narrative Review and Evidence-Based Practical Considerations.
Article in Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endometriosis is a chronic, estrogen-dependent inflammatory condition affecting approximately 10% of women of reproductive age and manifesting with pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, fatigue, and infertility. First-line treatment in most patients is hormonal therapy, and among the available options, contraceptives are frequently used. Short-acting contraceptives (SACs) have been employed off-label to manage endometriosis-related symptoms, yet comparative evidence regarding optimal formulations and regimens remains limited. This narrative review, part of the Agnodice Project, aims to synthesize recent evidence on the SAC formulation-specific effectiveness for endometriosis management, and to provide evidence-based practical considerations for endometriosis management. Methods: A literature search of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses providing data on non-contraceptive clinical benefits of SAC versus other SAC or SAC vs placebo or no treatment, including the period from 2014 to 2024, was conducted. Information was extracted as individual items related to endometriosis. Results: Of 86 studies included in the Agnodice Project, 10 systematic reviews and meta-analyses specifically addressed endometriosis, yielding 21 comparative items with significant differences. SACs effectively reduced dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain, and post-operative endometrioma recurrence, among others. Continuous regimens consistently outperformed cyclic schedules for pain control and quality of life. Among formulations, desogestrel monotherapy was superior across multiple outcomes in women with endometriosis. Furthermore, we present practical, expert considerations based on the synthesized evidence. Conclusions: SACs represent valuable first-line therapeutic options for endometriosis symptom management, with continuous regimens providing optimal symptom control and recurrence prevention. Formulation selection should be individualized based on symptom profile, safety profile, comorbidities, estrogen tolerance, and patient preference.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.