Topics covered include:
- Period Pain
- Endometriosis
- Bowel and Bladder pain
- Painful Sex
- Fatigue and more
To download the book follow this lin
http://www.drsusanevans.com/e-booklet.html
and click on 'Click here to download'
To download the book follow this lin
http://www.drsusanevans.com/e-booklet.html
and click on 'Click here to download'
This may be of interest to some of my readers, but I noticed that the National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health and the National Institute for Health and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellent have published their guidelines for the assessment and treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), a problem that can affect women with endometriosis.
To read the guidelines in their entirety follow this link
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK56536/
and click on ‘PDF version of this title’ in the right hand margin
Although the guide is aimed more at clinicians, I think it contains a lot of relevant and interesting information for patients who suffer with heavy menstrual bleeding. The guide covers such topics as:
Although these guidelines have been drawn up for the use in the UK, the evidence upon which the guidelines have been based was taken from international studies and are applicable to women all over the world.
Another set of interesting bits from the World Congress on Endometriosis 2011, so let’s get started with...
S. Banerjee from St Peter’s Hospital, Chertsey, UK (S#2-5) presented their work entitled
Identification of non-invasive markers of peritoneal deep infiltrating endometriosis in women with chronic pelvic pain.
The aim of this study was to record the symptoms and clinical observations of a group of 401 women with chronic pelvic pain. These women would then go for diagnostic laparoscopy to find the cause of their pain, then the results from the pain surveys and observations would be analysed to show if there is any difference between women with different diagnoses.
After the laparoscopies 167 women (42%) were diagnosed with deeply infiltrating endometriosis (DIE), 150 (37%) were diagnosed with superficial endometriosis and 84 women (21%) were found to not have endometriosis as the source of their symptoms. So, the focus of this study was to look at the difference in demographics and symptom profiles of women with DIE and compare it to women with superficial endometriosis to see if there were any significant differences that may help identify DIE before diagnostic surgery. This is how those factors broke down: women with DIE were on average 31 years old compared to 33 years old for those without. Dyschezia (painful bowel movements) throughout the month, a clinically immobile uterus, a palpable nodule, and the presence of an endometrioma (ovarian endometriotic cyst) were all more common in women with DIE. Interestingly, the authors then quantified the risk; so if all the above factors were present in one woman from this group, this raised their chance of being diagnosed with DIE from 42% to 82%. Conversely if all the above factors were absent it decreased the chance of them being diagnosed with DIE to 10%.
In conclusion this study will hopefully allow gynaecologists to identify women who have the highest chance of being diagnosed with DIE from the features of their pain symptoms and clinical observations, which in turn should make it easier for surgeons to know what they are looking for.
M.Takamura from University of Tokyo, Japan (S#4-1) resented the results of their study entitled
Probiotics inhibit the growth of endometriotic lesions in a murine model
You’re probably aware of some of the various commercial probiotic yoghurts and drinks available on the market at the moment, I must confess I have a probiotic drink myself with breakfast (it’s an acquired taste, I’ll tell you that much). Basically these products contain live bacteria that are supposedly beneficial to ones digestive system, if the marketing is to be believed. According to the authors of this study, these probiotics are recently gaining attention due to their ability to modulate the immune system in a favourable manner. This got the authors thinking that, due to the many immune system abnormalities associated with endometriosis, perhaps these probiotics may illicit some beneficial effects against the disease.
The way in which they studied this was to use a murine (mouse) model of endometriosis. Basically this involves surgically inducing endometriosis in a mouse. Now, although I’ll not go into detail about the positives and negatives of animal models, I will say though that despite the fact mice make excellent animals in which to model diseases and have a large amount of similarities to humans in more ways than you’d expect, in terms of modelling reproductive diseases, mice don’t have a menstrual cycle and have a distinctly different reproductive systems to humans so the true value of using mouse models may be someone questionable. Nevertheless it is one of the best tools we have, so until better comes along, we’re stuck with mice.
The authors then administered various doses of probiotics (containing such inventively named bacteria as L.acidophilus, L.casei, Bifidobacterium bifidium and Streptococcus thermophilus) to different groups of mice and noted any effects they had on the size or number of endometriotic lesions. Overall, the results of the study showed that mice receiving oral doses of the aforementioned probiotics suppressed the development of endometriotic lesions, reducing the size/growth, but not the number, of lesions. The authors note that, if this treatment works in a similar manner in humans, that fact that it causes no alteration to hormone levels may be beneficial for women.
G.M. Buck Louis from National Institute of Health, Rockville, USA (S#4-5) presented work from their collaborative research group entitled
Persistent organic pollutants and endometriosis: importance of biologic media for defining exposure – the endo study.
Now, talking about the relationship between endometriosis and environmental pollutants is opening a rather large can of worms because there are arguments both for and against the involvement of environmental pollutants in endometriosis. The arguments ‘for’ work on the premise that the mode of action of a lot of pollutants should increase the likelihood of developing endometriosis due to their ability to mimic estrogen and negatively affect the immune system in the human body. The arguments against rightly point out that the evidence supporting the role of pollutants in endometriosis is sketchy at best and, at present, does not prove any links between pollutant exposure and increase endometriosis risk in humans.
This study has obviously aimed to address some of the issues surrounding previous studies and provided a study with, from what I can see, is an extremely comprehensive methodology (which I’ll not go into here as it will take up too much space and may induce sedative effects). The study took women from 14 clinical centres undergoing laparoscopy or MRI for the diagnosis of endometriosis, then gave them questionnaires and took samples of blood, urine and fat and analysed the levels of various pollutants in these samples. The important difference to this study was the inclusion of analysing fat samples from women. Previous studies frequently use blood for analysis, but the problem with that is pollutants are transferred from the blood and accumulate in fatty tissue around the body, so sampling fat would be a much better indicator of pollutant exposure.
The results showed that the levels of several polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and hexachlorobenzene were significantly higher in the fatty tissue (but not blood or urine) of women with endometriosis. This further highlights the importance of selecting the correct biological sample when looking for relationships between environmental pollutants and endometriosis. It also adds weight to the argument supporting the role of environmental pollutants in the development of endometriosis, how exactly these pollutants elicit their effects remains to be conclusively proven.
As I mentioned briefly in my last post I attended the 11th world congress on endometriosis in Montpellier a few weeks ago. It’s a tough life having to travel to beautifully picturesque Mediterranean cities, but hey, somehow I managed to cope. The main body of the conference was run over three days where experts from all over the world presented their latest research and shared up to date knowledge about endometriosis. If you would like to see the whole program for the conference you can download it here. All in all it was a very enlightening few days, but don’t worry if you couldn’t make it yourself because over the next few weeks I’ll be posting highlights from the conference. Unfortunately, I can’t post about everything that was discussed because it would probably take more years to write than I will live, so I’ve gone through the different talks and posters and picked out the ones that I hope you’ll find the more interesting. I’ll start off with the oral presentations that were given then move onto the posters that were presented. I’ll also give a bit of my own interpretation of the science, but I won’t be doing much critical appraisal. So without further ado, let’s jump straight in.
R.S. Bevan from the Brighton and Sussex Medical School, UK (S#1-3) presented their work entitled ‘Alcohol consumption and endometriosis: A multi-centre, case-control study’
This study took 1,418 women from 10 countries that were undergoing laparoscopic surgery for either suspected endometriosis or tubal ligation. After surgery the main group were divided into three groups: Those who were found to have endometriosis (745 women), those who had symptoms but no disease was found (565) and those women undergoing sterilisation who had neither symptoms nor endometriosis (86). These women were asked to complete a questionnaire which gave included questions about alcohol consumption.
The results of this study showed that alcohol consumption between the three groups of women did not significantly vary. Although there is still more analysis of this data to be done it is still interest to see these preliminary findings. I think there may have been some expectation that alcohol consumption may be increased in women with endometriosis, perhaps due to the fact alcohol can give pain relief, so the results are interesting from that pint of view. There was also some discussion as to whether alcohol consumption increases the risk of endometriosis. I’m not sure whether or not this is folly. Mainly because the symptoms of endometriosis tend to begin around adolescence, but alcohol consumption doesn’t even seriously start for most people until their late teens, so I’m sure whether there could really be any connection between the two.
S.A. Missmer from Havard Medical School in Boston, US (S#1-4) presented their work entitled ‘Vitamin A and endometriosis risk: A prospective cohort study’
This study analysed consumption of different micronutrients in 1382 women with laparoscopically diagnosed endometriosis. What this study found was that increased consumption of vitamin A seems to reduce the risk of endometriosis. Or rather, I should say, reduced the risk of being diagnosed with endometriosis. These investigators reported a 21% reduction in risk of diagnosis of endometriosis when comparing the highest consumers of vitamin A with the lowest, with the association most prominent in women with no history of infertility, who had a BMI below 25 and who had smoked during their lifetime. The investigations are still undergoing to find out why this reduction in diagnosis risk was observed.
M.Kvaskoff from The Gustave Roussy Institute, France (S#1-5) presented their work entitled
‘Early life events and the risk of endometriosis: The French E3N cohort’
This study analysed questionnaire data from a large group of women with health insurance in France. The purpose of this study was to see if women with endometriosis had exposure to different factors during childhood that made them more susceptible to endometriosis in later life. This study found that both exposure to cats or dogs at home and living on a farm for more than 3 months during childhood increased the risk of endometriosis in later life.
Girls who started their periods before the age of 12 or who had short menstrual cycles before the age of 17 (a short cycle being anything less than 24 days, were also found to be at a higher risk of endometriosis.
Whilst the level of out if school exercise was unrelated to endometriosis risk, more time spent walking (i.e. greater than 5 hours per week) between the ages of 8 and 15 appeared to increase the risk of endometriosis. Higher exposure to UV radiation at place of birth was found to decrease endometriosis. There were a number of early life factors that were found to have no influence over the risk of endometriosis including: birth height/weight, being born premature, breast feeding and maternal smoking.
So what do we make of this study? Well firstly it is important to distinguish causal factors from incidental factors. What do I mean by causal and incidental? Firstly I’ll stop asking rhetoric questions, then I’ll tell you that a causal factor is a factor that is likely to actually increase the risk of endometriosis, whereas a incidental factor is one that is associated with a causal factor so appears to be associated with endometriosis even though it could have no baring directly on the development of the disease.
Let me give you an example; this study found that young girls who undertook more walking exercise were at higher risk of endometriosis. Does this mean that we should stop all young girls from walking so much? No, because if we look at the rest of the results we can see that girls who lived on a farm were at higher risk; girls who lived on a farm are likely to do more walking, so we can see that walking isn’t directly linked to endometriosis risk, rather it is incidentally linked to endo via other factors (such as childhood environment).
Well if life teaches us anything, it’s that some things are not logical, and endometriosis is one of those things. In terms of logicality, endometriosis is kind of like sticking your head in a washing machine filled with Salvador Dali and M.C Esher paintings.
Pictured: endometriosis
Because of this there are cases (albeit very rare cases) of endometriosis occurring in young girls and older women. Of note there have been reports of symptomatic endometriosis in girls as young as 8 and in women as old as 80. So how can we explain these odd, seemingly illogical occurrences, can we even explain them?
The answer is a resounding “well, sort of”. Endometriosis in postmenopausal women is perhaps the easier of the two entities to explain. Postmenopausal women may be taking hormone replacement therapy (HRT) which would provide any endometriotic implants with a steady supply of estrogen to keep them going. Some reports have even stated that postmenopausal women taking HRT have an increased, but poorly defined, risk of previous endometriosis recurring.
But (and there is always a ‘but’ to complicate matters), there have also been reports of postmenopausal women with no past history of the disease, suddenly developing endometriosis. There are a number of explanations for this though. Firstly, the woman may have had endometriosis lingering in her body all along, and any number of contributory factors may have suddenly caused it to grow. Secondly, if the woman has had any major surgery in her pelvic area (e.g. hysterectomy, oopherectomy etc) tiny bits of the endometrium may have been spread around her pelvic cavity during surgery, which may then implant to form endometriosis later on (this mechanism is thought to be one of the ways surgical scar endometriosis occurs).
An unanswered question remains though, if a woman is past menopause and not taking HRT how does the endometriosis get the estrogen it needs to survive? After menopause a woman’s ovaries begin to shut down and a drastic reduction in estrogen production occurs over a period of about 4 years. However, androgens are still produced, albeit at a diminishing rate, by the adrenal glands and ovaries after menopause. Androgens are another group of hormones that could loosely be described as being responsible for the development of masculine characteristics. Women also produce androgens, but at a lower level than men and androgens in women can be converted into estrogen. However, you need certain enzymes to convert androgens to estrogens, the most famous of which is aromatase.
Aromatase is an enzyme whose job it is to take hormones like testosterone and convert them into estrogen. Aromatase is expressed in a number of cell types including the ovaries, fat cells, endometrium and guess where else? That’s right, in some but not all, endometriotic cells too. This means that any endometriotic implant that expresses the aromatase enzyme can essentially make its own estrogen. Even with the low levels of androgens produced in postmenopausal women, endometriosis with active aromatase could produce its own estrogen and hence survive in a woman who has gone through the menopause.
Well, you may think, that all sounds very plausible but is there any evidence to substantiate this little theory of yours? Good question and yes there is. You see, there is a group of drugs called aromatase inhibitors that are sometimes given to women with endometriosis and there are no prizes for guessing that these drugs inhibit the aromatase enzyme. In some cases of women with postmenopausal endometriosis there is evidence to suggest treatment with aromatase inhibitors can significantly reduce their symptoms. Of course, the problem with aromatase inhibitors is that they decrease estrogen levels even further, which if you are past the menopause it probably going to lead to complications and adverse side effects.
But what of premenarcheal endometriosis? There is, some good evidence, which I have mentioned previously, concerning the discovery of displaced endometrium, a hallmark of endometriosis, being found in unborn human foetuses. Conveniently, the research group who made these previous discoveries have recently published another paper of their largest study yet confirming the cells that preclude endometriosis can be found in girls before they are even born. So, it would appear we have a possible answer for why such young girls can develop endometriosis; the bigger question though is how, and therein lies the rub.
At present the ‘how’ is the unanswerable question. Is there any reasonable explanation for how girls who haven’t even reached puberty can develop endometriosis? There are of course arguments that environmental pollutants can bring about the development of endometriosis, but the evidence for this is rather weak and highly debated so we can’t (or rather shouldn’t) draw any conclusions from that particular line of evidence, yet.
There are so many factors which are thought to influence the development of endometriosis such as; genetics, epigenetics, diet, lifestyle, environment, immune function, family history, that we may never have a singular cause for endometriosis. Some women may inherit it, some women may acquire it. Perhaps we need not think of endometriosis as one giant jigsaw to be pieced together; perhaps we need to see each case as its own, individual puzzle.