Shi Jinghua, Leng Jinhua
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
National Clinical Research Center for Obstetric & Gynecologic Diseases, Beijing, China.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Dec 15;9:938606. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.938606. eCollection 2022.
This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) in the treatment of dysmenorrhea.
Electronic databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, Science, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP, were searched before September 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and single-arm studies were included. Furthermore, the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Systematic Reviews version 1 was used for the risk of bias assessment on RCTs. The Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used for risk of bias assessment on non-randomized studies. The risk ratio (RR) was calculated for dichotomous data. Mean difference (MD) or standardized MD (SMD) were used as the effect size for continuous data.
A total of 11 studies involving 2,251 participants with dysmenorrhea were included. When Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) conventional 24/4-day regimen was compared with placebo, the total efficiency rate (defined as pain symptom disappearing or being relieved) in Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) 24/4-day regimen group was higher than in placebo group (RR = 5.55, 95%CI: 2.48-12.39, < 0.0001). No clear differences were found on risk of overall adverse events or specific adverse events. When Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) was compared with active control drugs, no clear differences were found on the total efficiency rate or visual analog scale (VAS) scores for dysmenorrhea and other related pain. The risk of overall adverse events decreased in Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) conventional 24/4-day regimen (13/53 vs. 66/148, RR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.33-0.91) when compared with active control drugs group. When Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) flexible extended regimen was compared with conventional 24/4-day regimen, the number of days of dysmenorrhea (MD=-3.98, 95%CI: -5.69 to -2.27), and dysmenorrhea associated with unscheduled bleedings (MD = -1.6, 95%CI: -2.8 to -0.5), were fewer in flexible extended regimen. In addition, there were no differences found on risk of adverse events (including mood changes, spotting, headache, breast pain, nausea, and vomiting) between compared groups ( > 0.05).
Drospirenone and Ethinylestradiol Tablets (II) could improve symptoms of dysmenorrhea and decrease other related pain symptoms. More high-quality evidence is needed to confirm the advantages.
[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021271605], identifier [CRD42021271605].
本系统评价旨在评估屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)治疗痛经的有效性和安全性。
于2022年9月之前检索电子数据库,即PubMed、Embase、Cochrane对照试验注册库(CENTRAL)、Scopus、Science、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据库和维普数据库。纳入随机对照试验(RCT)、非随机对照试验、队列研究、病例对照研究和单臂研究。此外,使用Cochrane系统评价偏倚风险工具第1版对RCT进行偏倚风险评估。使用干预性非随机研究的偏倚风险(ROBINS-I)工具对非随机研究进行偏倚风险评估。二分数据计算风险比(RR)。连续数据采用均数差(MD)或标准化均数差(SMD)作为效应量。
共纳入11项研究,涉及2251例痛经患者。将屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)常规24/4天方案与安慰剂比较时,屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)24/4天方案组的总有效率(定义为疼痛症状消失或缓解)高于安慰剂组(RR = 5.55,95%CI:2.48 - 12.39,P < 0.0001)。在总体不良事件或特定不良事件风险方面未发现明显差异。将屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)与活性对照药物比较时,在总有效率或痛经及其他相关疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分方面未发现明显差异。与活性对照药物组比较时,屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)常规24/4天方案的总体不良事件风险降低(13/53 vs. 66/148,RR = 0.55,95%CI:"0.33 - 0.91)。将屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)灵活延长方案与常规24/4天方案比较时,灵活延长方案的痛经天数(MD = - 3.98,95%CI: - 5.69至 - 2.27)以及与非计划出血相关的痛经(MD = - 1.6,95%CI: - 2.8至 - 0.5)较少。此外,比较组之间在不良事件(包括情绪变化、点滴出血"、头痛、乳房疼痛、恶心和呕吐)风险方面未发现差异(P > 0.05)。
屈螺酮炔雌醇片(II)可改善痛经症状并减轻其他相关疼痛症状。需要更多高质量证据来证实其优势。
[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021271605],标识符[CRD42021271605]