Efficacy of excision versus ablation for improving endometriosis related pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Surgical treatment of superficial peritoneal endometriosis includes excision or ablation. Controversy exists about which method is better for providing pain relief. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of excision versus ablation for improving the most frequently encountered endometriosis pain symptoms: dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, non-cyclic pelvic pain, and dyschezia. Methods: A search from inception to May 2020 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. RCTs comparing excision versus ablation for peritoneal endometriosis were included if they assessed dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, dyschezia, and pelvic pain/non-menstrual pain. Exclusion criteria included extra-peritoneal endometriosis or endometriomas, and non-English publications. Publications were assessed for risk of bias and quality of evidence using Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) and GradePro. Results: Of the 2025 records identified initially, four met inclusion criteria. The sample sizes of the included studies ranged from 24 to 133 participants. The excision and ablation groups included 204 participants each. There was no difference after excision or ablation for dysmenorrhea when comparing the mean change in pain scores from baseline to 12 months after surgery (−0.31, 95% CI −1.66, 1.04, p = 0.65), dyspareunia (−0.24, 95% CI −1.78, 1.30, p = 0.76), dyschezia (−0.72, 95% CI −1.94, 0.50, p = 0.25), or non-cyclic pain (−0.78, 95% CI −2.47, 0.91, p = 0.37). Conclusions: We found low to moderate quality evidence suggesting that neither excision nor ablation is superior in reduction of endometriosis-related pain up to 12 months after surgery.