ESHRE, Central office (Dr. Vermeulen), Meerstraat 60, Grimbergen, BE 1852, Belgium.
Disciplina de Ginecologia, Departamento de Obstetricia e Ginecologia (Dr. Abrao), Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Gynecologic Division, BP - A Beneficencia Portuguesa de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Nov;28(11):1822-1848. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.07.023. Epub 2021 Oct 21.
In the field of endometriosis, several classification, staging and reporting systems have been developed. Which endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published and validated for use in clinical practice?
A systematic PUBMED literature search was performed. Data were extracted and summarized.
na TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: Twenty-two endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems have been published between 1973 and 2021, each developed for specific, and different, purposes. There still is no international agreement on how to describe the disease. Studies evaluating the different systems are summarized showing a discrepancy between the intended and the evaluated purpose, and a general lack of validation data confirming a correlation with pain symptoms or quality of life for any of the current systems. A few studies confirm the value of the ENZIAN system for surgical description of deep endometriosis. With regards to infertility, the endometriosis fertility index has been confirmed valid for its intended purpose.
Of the 22 endometriosis classification, staging and reporting systems identified in this historical overview, only a few have been evaluated for the purpose for which they were developed. The literature search was limited to PUBMED. Unpublished classification, staging or reporting systems, or those published in books were not considered. It can be concluded that there is no international agreement on how to describe endometriosis or how to classify it, and that most classification/staging systems show no or very little correlation with patient outcomes. This overview of existing systems is a first step in working towards a universally accepted endometriosis classification.
在子宫内膜异位症领域，已经开发了几种分类、分期和报告系统。哪些子宫内膜异位症分类、分期和报告系统已发表并验证可用于临床实践？
进行了系统的 PUBMED 文献检索。提取和总结数据。
无
表的编制、综合和结果：1973 年至 2021 年期间发表了 22 种子宫内膜异位症分类、分期和报告系统，每种系统都是为特定的、不同的目的而开发的。目前仍然没有关于如何描述这种疾病的国际共识。总结了评估不同系统的研究，结果显示，在预期目的和评估目的之间存在差异，并且普遍缺乏验证数据，无法证实任何当前系统与疼痛症状或生活质量之间存在相关性。一些研究证实了 ENZIAN 系统在深部子宫内膜异位症手术描述中的价值。关于不孕，子宫内膜异位症生育指数已被证实符合其预期目的。
在这项历史回顾中确定的 22 种子宫内膜异位症分类、分期和报告系统中，只有少数系统针对其开发目的进行了评估。文献检索仅限于 PUBMED。未发表的分类、分期或报告系统，或发表在书籍中的系统未被考虑。可以得出结论，目前还没有关于如何描述子宫内膜异位症或如何对其进行分类的国际共识，而且大多数分类/分期系统与患者结局没有相关性或相关性很小。对现有系统的概述是朝着普遍接受的子宫内膜异位症分类迈出的第一步。
