#219 : Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Interventions for Pain and Quality of Life in the Treatment of Endometriosis: A Network Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background and Aims: Numerous endometriosis treatments exist, ranging from surgical to traditional medications to complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs). The ranking of treatments across management categories remains unknown. To address this research gap, this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to rank endometriosis treatments in terms of efficacy and safety for endometriosis-related pain and quality of life. Method: A systematic literature search and fixed effects NMA was conducted. Eight databases were searched from inception to August 2022. All randomised control trials (RCTs) in women with surgically confirmed endometriosis were considered. Results: After screening 8,668 studies, 165 RCTs were included, consisting of 26,762 participants, investigating 48 medical, 13 CAMs and 16 surgical interventions. Preliminary analysis of the CAMs interventions (9 RCTs, n=522) suggested acupuncture (SMD -1.96; 95%CI: -2.63, -1.29), olive oil (SMD -1.68; 95%CI: -2.69, -0.67), fatty acid supplements (SMD -1.48; 95% CI: -2.15, -0.81), contraception + Chinese medicines (SMD -1.28; 95%CI: -2.39, -0.16), Chinese medicine (SMD -0.91, 95%CI: -1.78, -0.04) and vitamin C&E (SMD -0.38; 95%CI -0.89, 0.13) demonstrated a reduction in pain compared to placebo. There was insufficient evidence to detect a difference in pain using Vitamin D compared to placebo (SMD 0.09 95% CI: -0.55, 0.73). Complete results, including the individual and combined categories within a Bayesian framework and intervention ranking, will be available for ASPIRE 2023. Conclusion: This is the first NMA to compare the evidence of all endometriosis treatments. The findings have the potential to guide treatment decisions and guideline development.