David Rittenberg

Endometriosis: Diagnosis and Management

OBJECTIVE To improve the understanding of endometriosis and to provide evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of endometriosis. OUTCOMES OUTCOMES evaluated include the impact of the medical and surgical management of endometriosis on womens experience of morbidity and infertility. METHODS Members of the guideline committee were selected on the basis of individual expertise to represent a range of practical and academic experience in terms of both location in Canada and type of practice, as well as subspecialty expertise along with general gynaecology background. The committee reviewed all available evidence in the English and French medical literature and available data from a survey of Canadian women. Recommendations were established as consensus statements. The final document was reviewed and approved by the Executive and Council of the SOGC. RESULTS This document provides a summary of up-to-date evidence regarding diagnosis, investigations, and medical and surgical management of endometriosis. The resulting recommendations may be adapted by individual health care workers when serving women with this condition. CONCLUSIONS Endometriosis is a common and sometimes debilitating condition for women of reproductive age. A multidisciplinary approach involving a combination of lifestyle modifications, medications, and allied health services should be used to limit the impact of this condition on activities of daily living and fertility. In some circumstances surgery is required to confirm the diagnosis and provide therapy to achieve the desired goal of pain relief or improved fecundity. Women who find an acceptable management strategy for this condition may have an improved quality of life or attain their goal of successful pregnancy. EVIDENCE Medline and Cochrane databases were searched for articles in English and French on subjects related to endometriosis, pelvic pain, and infertility from January 1999 to October 2009 in order to prepare a Canadian consensus guideline on the management of endometriosis. VALUES The quality of evidence was rated with use of the criteria described by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations for practice were ranked according to the method described by the Task Force. See Table 1. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS Implementation of the guideline recommendations will improve the care of women with pain and infertility associated with endometriosis.

Adhesion Prevention in Gynaecological Surgery

OBJECTIVES To review the etiology and incidence of and associative factors in the formation of adhesions following gynaecological surgery. To review evidence for the use of available means of adhesion prevention following gynaecological surgery. OPTIONS Women undergoing pelvic surgery are at risk of developing abdominal and/or pelvic adhesive disease postoperatively. Surgical technique and commercial adhesion prevention systems may decrease the risk of postoperative adhesion formation. OUTCOMES The outcomes measured are the incidence of postoperative adhesions, complications related to the formation of adhesions, and further intervention relative to adhesive disease. EVIDENCE Medline, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched for articles published in English from 1990 to March 2009, using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, cohort studies, and meta-analyses specifically addressing postoperative adhesions, adhesion prevention, and adhesive barriers. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to March 2009. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES The quality of evidence was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. Meticulous surgical technique is a means of preventing adhesions. This includes minimizing tissue trauma, achieving optimal hemostasis, minimizing the risk of infection, and avoiding contaminants (e.g., fecal matter) and the use of foreign materials (e.g., talcum powder) when possible. (II-2). 2. The risk of adhesions increases with the total number of abdominal and pelvic surgeries performed on one patient; every surgery needs to be carefully considered in this context. (II-2). 3. Polytetrafluoroethylene (Gore-Tex) barrier is more effective than no barrier or oxidized regenerated cellulose in preventing adhesion formation. (I). 4. Oxidized regenerated cellulose (Interceed) adhesion barrier is associated with a reduced incidence of pelvic adhesion formation at both laparoscopy and laparotomy when complete hemostasis is achieved. Oxidized regenerated cellulose may increase the risk of adhesions if optimal hemostasis is not achieved. (II-2). 5. Chemically modified sodium hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose (Seprafilm) is effective in preventing adhesion formation, especially following myomectomies. There is insufficient evidence on the effect of sodium hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose on long-term clinical outcomes such as fertility, chronic pelvic pain or small bowel obstruction. (II-2). 6. No adverse effects have been reported with the use of oxidized regenerated cellulose, polytetrafluoroethylene, or sodium hyaluronate/carboxymethylcellulose. (II-1). 7. Various pharmacological agents have been marketed as a means of preventing adhesions. None of these agents are presently available in Canada. There is insufficient evidence for the use of pharmacological agents in preventing adhesions. (III-C). RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Surgeons should attempt to perform surgical procedures using the least invasive method possible in order to decrease the risk of adhesion formation. (II-1B ). When feasible, for example, a laparoscopic surgical approach is preferable to an abdominal approach, and a vaginal or laparoscopic hysterectomy is preferable to an abdominal hysterectomy. 2. Precautions should be taken at surgery to minimize tissue trauma in order to decrease the risk of postoperative adhesions. These precautions include limiting packing, crushing, and manipulating of tissues to what is strictly required for safe completion of the procedure. (III-B). 3. Surgeons could consider using an adhesion barrier for patients who are at high risk of forming clinically significant adhesions (i.e., patients who have endometriosis or pelvic inflammatory disease or who are undergoing a myomectomy). If there is a risk of ongoing bleeding from the surgical site, oxidized regenerated cellulose (Interceed) should not be used as it may increase the risk of adhesions in this situation. (II-2B).

Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Pre-Menopausal Women

BACKGROUND Abnormal uterine bleeding is the direct cause of a significant health care burden for women, their families, and society as a whole. Up to 30% of women will seek medical assistance for this problem during their reproductive years. This guideline replaces previous clinical guidelines on the topic and is aimed to enable health care providers with the tools to provide the latest evidence-based care in the diagnosis and the medical and surgical management of this common problem. OBJECTIVE To provide current evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) among women of reproductive age. OUTCOMES Outcomes evaluated include the impact of AUB on quality of life and the results of interventions including medical and surgical management of AUB. METHODS Members of the guideline committee were selected on the basis of individual expertise to represent a range of practical and academic experience in terms of location in Canada, type of practice, subspecialty expertise, and general gynaecology background. The committee reviewed relevant evidence in the English medical literature including published guidelines. Recommendations were established as consensus statements. The final document was reviewed and approved by the Executive and Council of the SOGC. RESULTS This document provides a summary of up-to-date evidence regarding diagnosis, investigations, and medical and surgical management of AUB. The resulting recommendations may be adapted by individual health care workers when serving women with this condition. CONCLUSIONS Abnormal uterine bleeding is a common and sometimes debilitating condition in women of reproductive age. Standardization of related terminology, a systematic approach to diagnosis and investigation, and a step-wise approach to intervention is necessary. Treatment commencing with medical therapeutic modalities followed by the least invasive surgical modalities achieving results satisfactory to the patient is the ultimate goal of all therapeutic interventions. EVIDENCE Published literature was retrieved through searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library in March 2011 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g. uterine hemorrhage, menorrhagia) and key words (e.g. menorrhagia, heavy menstrual bleeding, abnormal uterine bleeding). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English and published from January 1999 to March 2011. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to February 2013. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table). BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS Implementation of the guideline recommendations will improve the health and well-being of women with abnormal uterine bleeding, their families, and society. The economic cost of implementing these guidelines in the Canadian health care system was not considered.

Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery

OBJECTIVE To provide Canadian gynaecologists with evidence-based direction for female genital cosmetic surgery in response to increasing requests for, and availability of, vaginal and vulvar surgeries that fall well outside the traditional realm of medically-indicated reconstructions. EVIDENCE Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library in 2011 and 2012 using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (female genital cosmetic surgery). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to May 2012. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table). Recommendations 1. The obstetrician and gynaecologist should play an important role in helping women to understand their anatomy and to respect individual variations. (III-A) 2. For women who present with requests for vaginal cosmetic procedures, a complete medical, sexual, and gynaecologic history should be obtained and the absence of any major sexual or psychological dysfunction should be ascertained. Any possibility of coercion or exploitation should be ruled out. (III-B) 3. Counselling should be a priority for women requesting female genital cosmetic surgery. Topics should include normal variation and physiological changes over the lifespan, as well as the possibility of unintended consequences of cosmetic surgery to the genital area. The lack of evidence regarding outcomes and the lack of data on the impact of subsequent changes during pregnancy or menopause should also be discussed and considered part of the informed consent process. (III-L) 4. There is little evidence to support any of the female genital cosmetic surgeries in terms of improvement to sexual satisfaction or self-image. Physicians choosing to proceed with these cosmetic procedures should not promote these surgeries for the enhancement of sexual function and advertising of female genital cosmetic surgical procedures should be avoided (III-L) 5. Physicians who see adolescents requesting female genital cosmetic surgery require additional expertise in counselling adolescents. Such procedures should not be offered until complete maturity including genital maturity, and parental consent is not required at that time. (III-L) 6. Non-medical terms, including but not restricted to vaginal rejuvenation, clitoral resurfacing, and G-spot enhancement, should be recognized as marketing terms only, with no medical origin; therefore they cannot be scientifically evaluated. (III-L).

Endometrial Ablation in the Management of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding

BACKGROUND Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is the direct cause of a significant health care burden for women, their families, and society as a whole. Up to 30% of women will seek medical assistance for the problem during their reproductive years. OBJECTIVE To provide current evidence-based guidelines on the techniques and technologies used in endometrial ablation (EA), a minimally invasive technique for the management of AUB of benign origin. METHODS Members of the guideline committee were selected on the basis of individual expertise to represent a range of practical and academic experience in terms of both location in Canada and type of practice, as well as subspecialty expertise and general background in gynaecology. The committee reviewed all available evidence in the English medical literature, including published guidelines, and evaluated surgical and patient outcomes for the various EA techniques. Recommendations were established by consensus. EVIDENCE Published literature was retrieved through searches of MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library in 2013 and 2014 using appropriate controlled vocabulary and key words (endometrial ablation, hysteroscopy, menorrhagia, heavy menstrual bleeding, AUB, hysterectomy). RESULTS were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies written in English from January 2000 to November 2014. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to December 2014. Grey (unpublished) literature was identifies through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1). RESULTS This document reviews the evidence regarding the available techniques and technologies for EA, preoperative and postoperative care, operative set-up, anaesthesia, and practical considerations for practice. BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS Implementation of the guideline recommendations will improve the provision of EA as an effective treatment of AUB. Following these recommendations would allow the surgical procedure to be performed safely and maximize success for patients. CONCLUSIONS EA is a safe and effective minimally invasive option for the treatment of AUB of benign etiology. Summary Statements 1. Endometrial ablation is a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical procedure that has become a well-established alternative to medical treatment or hysterectomy to treat abnormal uterine bleeding in select cases. (I) 2. Endometrial preparation can be used to facilitate resectoscopic endometrial ablation (EA) and can be considered for some non-resectoscopic techniques. For resectoscopic EA, preoperative endometrial thinning results in higher short-term amenorrhea rates, decreased irrigant fluid absorption, and shorter operative time than no treatment. (I) 3. Non-resectoscopic techniques are technically easier to perform than resectoscopic techniques, have shorter operative times, and allow the use of local rather than general anaesthesia. However, both techniques have comparable patient satisfaction and reduction of heavy menstrual bleeding. (I) 4. Both resectoscopic and non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation (EA) have low complication rates. Uterine perforation, fluid overload, hematometra, and cervical lacerations are more common with resectoscopic EA; perioperative nausea/vomiting, uterine cramping, and pain are more common with non-resectoscopic EA. (I) 5. All non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation devices available in Canada have demonstrated effectiveness in decreasing menstrual flow and result in high patient satisfaction. The choice of which device to use depends primarily on surgical judgement and the availability of resources. (I) 6. The use of local anaesthetic and blocks, oral analgesia, and conscious sedation allows for the provision of non-resectoscopic EA in lower resource-intense environments including regulated non-hospital settings. (II-2) 7. Low-risk patients with satisfactory pain tolerance are good candidates to undergo endometrial ablation in settings outside the operating room or in free-standing surgical centres. (II-2) 8. Both resectoscopic and non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation are relatively safe procedures with low complication rates. The complications perforation with potential injury to contiguous structures, hemorrhage, and infection. (II-2) 9. Combined hysteroscopic sterilization and endometrial ablation can be safe and efficacious while favouring a minimally invasive approach. (II-2) Recommendations 1. Preoperative assessment should be comprehensive to rule out any contraindication to endometrial ablation. (II-2A) 2. Patients should be counselled about the need for permanent contraception following endometrial ablation. (II-2B) 3. Recommended evaluations for abnormal uterine bleeding, including but not limited to endometrial sampling and an assessment of the uterine cavity, are necessary components of the preoperative assessment. (II-2B) 4. Clinicians should be vigilant for complications unique to resectoscopic endometrial ablation such as those related to fluid distention media and electrosurgical injuries. (III-A) 5. For resectoscopic endometrial ablation, a strict protocol should be followed for fluid monitoring and management to minimize the risk of complications of distension medium overload. (III-A) 6. If uterine perforation is suspected to have occurred during cervical dilatation or with the resectoscope (without electrosurgery), the procedure should be abandoned and the patient should be closely monitored for signs of intraperitoneal hemorrhage or visceral injury. If the perforation occurs with electrosurgery or if the mechanism of perforation is uncertain, abdominal exploration is warranted to obtain hemostasis and rule out visceral injury. (III-B) 7. With resectoscopic endometrial ablation, if uterine perforation has been ruled out acute hemorrhage may be managed by using intrauterine Foley balloon tamponade, injecting intracervical vasopressors, or administering rectal misoprostol. (III-B) 8. If repeat endometrial ablation (EA) is considered following non-resectoscopic or resectoscopic EA, it should be performed by a hysteroscopic surgeon with direct visualization of the cavity. Patients should be counselled about the increased risk of complications with repeat EA. (II-2A) 9. If significant intracavitary pathology is present, resectoscopic endometrial ablation combined with hysteroscopic myomectomy or polypectomy should be considered in a non-fertility sparing setting. (II-3A).

Oral contraceptives and the risk of venous thromboembolism: An update

To provide current and emerging evidence on oral contraceptives and the risk of venous thromboembolism.

Technical Update on Tissue Morcellation During Gynaecologic Surgery: Its Uses, Complications, and Risks of Unsuspected Malignancy

OBJECTIVE To review the use of tissue morcellation in minimally invasive gynaecological surgery. OUTCOMES Morcellation may be used in gynaecological surgery to allow removal of large uterine specimens, providing women with a minimally invasive surgical option. Adverse oncologic outcomes of tissue morcellation should be mitigated through improved patient selection, preoperative investigations, and novel techniques that minimize tissue dispersion. EVIDENCE Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed and Medline in the spring of 2014 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (leiomyomsarcoma, uterine neoplasm, uterine myomectomy, hysterectomy) and key words (leiomyoma, endometrial cancer, uterine sarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, morcellation, and MRI). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date limits but results were limited to English or French language materials. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to August 2014. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies. VALUES The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. (Table 1) BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: Gynaecologists may offer women minimally invasive surgery and this may involve tissue morcellation and the use of a power morcellator for specimen retrieval. Women should be counselled that in the case of unexpected uterine sarcoma or endometrial cancer, the use of a morcellator is associated with increased risk of tumour dissemination. Appropriate training and safe practices should be in place before offering tissue morcellation. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. Uterine sarcomas may be difficult to diagnose preoperatively. The risk of an unexpected uterine sarcoma following surgery for presumed benign uterine leiomyoma is approximately 1 in 350, and the rate of leiomyosarcoma is 1 in 500. (II-2) This risk increases with age. (II-2) 2. An unexpected uterine sarcoma treated by primary surgery involving tumour disruption, including morcellation of the tumour, has the potential for intra-abdominal tumour-spread and a worse prognosis. (II-2) 3. Uterus-sparing surgery remains a safe option for patients with symptomatic leiomyomas who desire future fertility. (II-1) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Techniques for morcellation of a uterine specimen vary, and physicians should consider employing techniques that minimize specimen disruption and intra-abdominal spread. (III-C) 2. Each patient presenting with uterine leiomyoma should be assessed for the possible presence of malignancy, based on her risk factors and preoperative imaging, although the value of these is limited. (III-C) 3. Preoperative endometrial biopsy and cervical assessment to avoid morcellation of potentially detectable malignant and premalignant conditions is recommended. (II-2A) 4. Hereditary cancer syndromes that increase the risk of uterine malignancy should be considered a contraindication to uncontained uterine morcellation. (III-C) 5. Uterine morcellation is contraindicated in women with established or suspected cancer. (II-2A) If there is a high index of suspicion of a uterine sarcoma prior to surgery, patients should be advised to proceed with a total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingectomy, and possible oophorectomy. (II-2C) A gynaecologic oncology consultation should be obtained. 6. Tissue morcellation techniques require appropriate training and experience. Safe practice initiatives surrounding morcellation technique and the use of equipment should be implemented at the local level. (II-3B) 7. Morcellation is an acceptable option for retrieval of benign uterine specimens and may facilitate a minimally invasive surgical approach, which is associated with decreased perioperative risks. Each patient should be counselled about the possible risks associated with the use of morcellation, including the risks associated with underlying malignancy. (III-C).

Adhesion prevention in gynaecological surgery: No. 243, June 2010

To review the etiology and incidence of and associative factors in the formation of adhesions following gynaecological surgery. To review evidence for the use of available means of adhesion prevention following gynaecological surgery.

Sexual and Reproductive Health Counselling by Health Care Professionals

This document reflects emerging clinical and scientific advances on the date issued, and is subject to change. The information should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed. Local institutions can dictate amendments to these opinions. They should be well documented if modified at the local level. None of these contents may be reproduced in any form without prior written permission of the SOGC. This policy statement was prepared by the Social and Sexual Issues Committee, reviewed by the Family Physicians Advisory Committee and the Clinical Practice Gynaecology Committee, and approved by the Executive and Council of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. SOCIAL AND SEXuAL ISSuES COMMITTEE Margaret Burnett, MD (Chair), Winnipeg MB Anjali Aggarwal, MD, Toronto ON Victoria Davis, MD, Scarborough ON Jeffrey Dempster, MD, Halifax NS William Fisher, PhD, London ON Karen MacKinnon, RN, PhD, Victoria BC Rosana Pellizzari, MD, Peterborough ON Viola Polomeno, RN, PhD, Ottawa ON Maegan Rutherford, MD, Halifax NS Vyta Senikas, MD, Ottawa ON Marie-Soleil Wagner, MD, Montreal QC FAMILY PHYSICIANS ADVISORY COMMITTEE William Ehman, MD (Chair), Nanaimo BC Anne Biringer, MD, Toronto ON Andrée Gagnon, MD, Blainville QC Lisa Graves, MD, Sudbury ON Jonathan Hey, MD, Saskatoon SK Jill Konkin, MD, Edmonton AB Francine Léger, MD, Montreal QC Cindy Marshall, MD, Lower Sackville NS