Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Obstet Gynecol Rep. 2017 Jan 27;6(1):34–41. doi: 10.1007/s13669-017-0187-1

Endometriosis: Epidemiology, Diagnosis and Clinical Management

Parveen Parasar 1,2, Pinar Ozcan 2, Kathryn L Terry 3,4,*
PMCID: PMC5737931  NIHMSID: NIHMS847220  PMID: 29276652

Abstract

Purpose of review

Endometriosis is a disease of adolescents and reproductive-aged women characterized by the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterine cavity and commonly associated with chronic pelvic pain and infertility. Here we review the epidemiology of endometriosis as well as potential biomarkers for detection and with the goal of highlighting risk factors that could be used in combination with biomarkers to identify and treat women with endometriosis earlier..

Recent findings

Early age at menarche, shorter menstrual length, and taller height are associated with a higher risk of endometriosis while parity, higher body mass index (BMI) and smoking are associated with decreased risk. Endometriosis often presents as infertility or continued pelvic pain despite treatment with analgesics and cyclic oral contraceptive pills.

Summary

Despite a range of symptoms, diagnosis of endometriosis is often delayed due to lack of non-invasive, definitive and consistent biomarkers for diagnosis of endometriosis. Hormone therapy and analgesics are used for treatment of symptomatic endometriosis. However, the efficacy of these treatments are limited as endometriosis often recurs. In this review, we describe potential diagnostic biomarkers and risk factors that may be used as early non-invasive in vitro tools for identification of endometriosis to minimize diagnostic delay and improve reproductive health of patients.

Keywords: Endometriosis, Pain, Infertility, Biomarkers, Management

Introduction

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial glands and stroma like lesions outside of the uterus [1]. The lesions can be peritoneal lesions, superficial implants or cysts on the ovary, or deep infiltrating disease [2]. While there is no definitive etiology of endometriosis, there are several hypotheses regarding how endometriotic lesions develop. One possible mechanism is retrograde menstruation, a feature of the menstrual cycle in women and non-human primates, which is an outflow of the endometrial lining through the patent fallopian tubes into the pelvic space. This retrograde flow, along with potential hematogenous or lymphatic circulation, may result in the seeding of endometrial tissue in ectopic sites. However, retrograde menstruation is common (perhaps universal among menstruating women) while endometriosis is much less common. Therefore, other factors, such as hormonal, inflammatory, or immunologic milieu may determine whether lesions deposited in the pelvic cavity implant and persist [36]. Alternatively, endometriosis lesions may arise from Müllerian remnants that did not properly differentiate or migrate during fetal development or from circulating blood cells that transdifferentiate into endometriosis [79]. Similarly, the characteristics of the local environment would influence the maintenance of these endometriotic lesions. When considering these etiologic hypotheses, it is important to recognize that endometriotic lesions are antigenically similar to eutopic endometrium but not necessarily endometrium.

Endometriosis affects 10–15% of all women of reproductive age [1] and 70% of women with chronic pelvic pain [10]. Unfortunately, for many of these women there is often a delay in diagnosis of endometriosis resulting in unnecessary suffering and reduced quality of life. In patients aged 18–45 years, the average delay is 6.7 years [11]. As most women with endometriosis report the onset of symptoms during adolescence, early referral, diagnosis, identification of disease and treatment may mitigate pain, prevent disease progression and thus preserve fertility [1214]. Barriers to early diagnosis include the high cost of diagnosis and treatment in adolescent patients and presentation of confounding symptoms such as cyclic and acyclic pain. Thus, a non-invasive tool to diagnose endometriosis could facilitate earlier diagnosis and intervention that could ultimately improve quality of life and preserve fertility.

The immunologic, genetic, and serum markers proposed to date for endometriosis diagnosis are not sufficiently sensitive and specific to justify their use as a screening test. In this review, we will discuss the epidemiology of endometriosis and current diagnostic tools and available potential diagnostic biomarkers for endometriosis that may be used to better clinically manage the disease to improve the quality of life of adult and adolescent patients.

Presentation and clinical course of endometriosis

Clinical presentation of endometriosis varies in women. Patients often present with symptoms such as intermenstrual bleeding, painful periods (dysmenorrhea), painful intercourse (dyspareunia), painful defecation (dyschezia) and painful urination (dysuria) [15]. Pelvic pain may present before menstruation begins. Often, endometriosis can be asymptomatic, only coming to a clinician’s attention during evaluation for infertility.

Classification of endometriosis associated pain symptoms have been established by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) based on the morphology of peritoneal and pelvic implants such as red, white and black lesions, percentage of involvement of each lesion should be included. The pelvis is inspected in clockwise or counterclockwise fashion. Number, size, and location endometrial implants, plaques, endometriomas and adhesions should be noted. Endometriosis in bowel, urinary tract, fallopian tube, vagina, cervix, skin, or other locations should be documented per ASRM guidelines. Stages of endometriosis according to ASRM guidelines are stage I, II, III, and IV determined based on the point scores and correspond to minimal, mild, moderate and severe endometriosis [16].

Epidemiology and risk factors

Several reproductive factors have been consistently associated with risk for endometriosis (Table 1), suggesting hormonal variation may have a significant impact on the risk of developing endometriosis. For instance, early age at menarche (17, 1820, 33) and short menstrual cycle length (1923) are associated with an increased risk, while parity (20, 2426) and current oral contraceptive use (27) are associated with a decreased risk. Circulating estradiol and estrone, which stimulate ectopic and eutopic endometrial tissue, are higher among women with an earlier age at menarche and in nulliparous women (2832). Though not a reproductive risk factor, a consistent inverse association has also been observed between body mass index (BMI) and endometriosis (17, 1819, 22, 3338) may also relate to hormonal differences between heavy and lean women.

Table 1.

Risk factors for endometriosis

Factors associated with
increased risk
References Factors associated with decreased
risk
References
Earlier age at menarche [17, 1820, 33] Parity [20, 2426]
Shorter menstrual cycle length [1923] Current oral contraceptive use [27, 41]
Taller height [33, 35] Smoking [19, 22, 26, 37, 42, 43, 44, 4548]
Alcohol use [36, 51, 52] Higher body mass index [17, 18, 19, 22, 33, 3438]
Caffeine intake [50] Regular exercise [22, 43]
Fish and omega 3 fatty acids [61]

Unfortunately, the evaluation of tubal ligation, parity, and oral contraceptive use in relation to endometriosis risk have been plagued by methodologic issues. Tubal ligation has been hypothesized to decrease endometriosis risk through blocking retrograde menstruation from reaching the pelvic cavity. However, the association between tubal ligation and endometriosis is difficult to interpret since endometriosis is characterized by infertility and women who seek a tubal ligation are more likely to be parous than the general population (3, 39, 40). The association between oral contraceptive use and endometriosis risk is mixed with most (27, 41) but not all showing a decreased risk for current users but an increased risk for past users. However, oral contraceptives are used to treat endometriosis-associated pain and, therefore, this association may reflect suppression of endometriosis symptoms while on oral contraceptives that reappear after the oral contraceptives are stopped.

The association between smoking and endometriosis is unclear. Although smoking is deleterious to many other aspects of health, smoking is associated with a decreased risk of endometriosis in some (42, 19, 22) but not all (43, 44, 26, 37) studies. Interestingly, exposure to cigarette smoke in utero is associated with an 80% reduction endometriosis risk, but passive smoking exposure during childhood increases risk (4547). Although the mechanism is unknown, circulating estrogens are known to be lower in women who smoke (48) and could inhibit the growth and persistence of endometriotic tissue.

The association between alcohol and caffeine consumption is similarly mixed and may depend on fertility status. Among infertile women, several studies have reported increased risk with higher alcohol or caffeine intake (4952). Increased bioavailable estrogen levels in women who consume moderate amounts of alcohol lend biologic credibility to the association. However, studies not restricted to infertile women have shown no association (33, 5355).

Other lifestyle factors and dietary patterns that influence endometriosis risk may relate to their ability to mitigate inflammation. Physical activity and omega-3 dietary fatty acids may reduce levels of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), interleukin 6 (IL6) and other inflammatory markers [5660]. While the association between physical activity and endometriosis is unclear (43), higher intake of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids has been associated with reduced endometriosis risk [61].

Despite recent advances in identifying risk factors for endometriosis, the field continues to be limited by requiring surgical diagnosis of the disease, often done laproscopically to confirm effected cases and appropriate controls (those that are sampled from the same base population as the cases). Validation is needed in large cohorts of women with laproscopically-confirmed endometriosis and appropriate control groups. Furthermore, as reproductive and lifestyle factors change, such as changes in contraception formulations and patterns of use as well as delayed childbearing, newer cohorts of young women are needed to understand how changes in established factors may influence endometriosis incidence as well as aid in the discovery of novel risk factors. Ultimately, the establishment of a defined set of endometriosis risk factors could lead to the identification of a group of women and girls with a high enough risk profile to warrant screening. Furthermore, these risk factors can also provide new insights into the etiology of the disease, which could lead to important advances in identifying potential screening biomarkers and treatment targets.

Diagnosis of endometriosis

Preliminary diagnosis of endometriosis is usually done on the basis of clinical history since most women show normal results of physical examination. Clinicians palpate for uterine or adnexal tenderness, a retroverted fixture, nodulating uterosacral ligament, and any pelvic masses. A tenderness on palpation of posterior fornix is the most common finding. Pelvic pain is also a symptom of other diseases such as pelvic adhesions, adenomyosis, and gastrointestinal or urologic disorders; therefore, differential diagnosis is important (7). Other causes of pelvic pain should be ruled out by carrying out appropriate diagnostic tests like urinalysis, Pap smear, pregnancy test, vaginal and endocervical swabs. Pelvic ultrasound scans are performed to facilitate diagnosis of an endometrioma, fibroids and ovarian cysts.

Pelvic masses are visualized by the use of transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound. Transvaginal ultrasound is used to better visualize endometrium and uterine cavity and detect ovarian endometriotic cysts but does not rule out peritoneal endometriosis, endometriosis-associated adhesions and deep infiltrating endometriosis [6670]. Occasionally, a magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scans are conducted to characterize the pelvic masses.

Despite the aforementioned tentative tests available, gold standard for confirmatory diagnosis of endometriosis is laparoscopic inspection with histologic confirmation after biopsy [66]. Endometriotic lesions are visualized by the use of laparoscope; however, the correlation between clinical symptoms and disease burden is poor [66, 71].

Since laparoscopy is not practical as a first line diagnostic tool, investigators have sought to identify non-invasive tools for early diagnosis that might prevent or delay progression of endometriosis (Table 2). Despite the range of blood tests that have been evaluated, a reliable test has yet to be identified for the diagnosis of endometriosis [72, 73]. A change in levels of analytes, proteins, microRNAs, and other markers corresponding to a disease state could be the basis for identifying novel biomarkers. Women with endometriosis show altered levels of CA-125, cytokines, angiogenic and growth factors compared to normal women, but none of the markers have been proven to be definitive clinical tool for diagnosis of endometriosis.

Table 2.

Potential diagnostic biomarkers for endometriosis

Biological groups Biomarkers References
Inflammatory markers-Cytokines IL-1 β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17, IL-21, RANTES, TNF-α, IFN-gamma, MCP-1, MIF, CRP 75
Steroids and hormones ERs, 17 βHSD, aromatase 76
Growth factors IGF, Activin, TGF β1, HGF, annexin-1 75.77
Cell adhesion and extracellular matrix molecules Integrins, Vimentin, E-cadherin, osteopontin, ICAM-1 (CD54), β-catenin, FAK 7880
Angiogenesis VEGF, NGF, FGF-2, Leptin, IGFBP-3, glycodelin, M-CSF, angiopoeitin-1 and −2, MVD, endoglin and thrombospondin-1 81, 82
Apoptosis and cell cycle control Telomerase activity, Pak-1, cyclin D1, Survivin, Bcl-2, MCL-1, Bax, Bcl-xL, Bcl-xS 83
Stem cell markers CD9, CD34, Oct-4 8486
Genomics HOXA10, 3p, 5q, 7p, 9p, 11q, 16q, 17p, 17q, 18q, 19p, 19q 87
Proteomics The analysis of different expression of certain peptides and proteins in endometriosis 88
Tissue remodeling MMP-2, MMP9, TIMPs, urokinase 8990

Regulated upon Activation, Normal T-cell Expressed and Secreted (RANTES), Monocyte chemotactic protein 1 (MCP-1), Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), Microvessel density (MVD), Focal adhesion kinase (FAK), Insulin-like growth (IGF), Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), Matrix metalloproteinase (MMP), Tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs), Pak-1 (p21 activated kinase-1), 17 β hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (17 βHSD), Estrogen receptors (ERs)

Biomarkers for the diagnosis of endometriosis

Current guidelines recommend that the histological examination of specimens collected from the suspicious areas during the visual inspection of the pelvis at laparoscopy is the gold standard for diagnosis of endometriosis [71]. However, laparoscopy may not be appropriate for all women with a history and physical examination suggestive of endometriosis. Therefore, care has been given to identify simple and reliable biomarkers of endometriosis for early noninvasive or semi-invasive diagnosis of this disease. Many studies have evaluated the diagnostic value of biomarkers for endometriosis but to date there is no reliable recommended biomarkers in endometrial tissue, menstrual or uterine fluids and immunologic markers in blood or urine for clinical use as a diagnostic test for endometriosis yet [74].

By using semi or non-invasive diagnostic tools to evaluate biomarkers from blood, urine, or menstrual fluid, a surgical procedure could be avoided and women with endometriosis, who could benefit from surgery to increase fertility and decrease pain, could be identified. Moreover, it provides data early in the disease process that could aid in treatment or prevent the progression of disease in particular for women with minimal-mild disease [75]. A list of candidate biomarkers for endometriosis diagnosis and progression are summarized in (Table 2). A combination of these biomarkers may improve the sensitivity and specificity over any single biomarker [74]. Moreover, stem cell, proteomic and genomic studies could provide advanced opportunities for discovery of the potentially new reliable diagnostic biomarkers with high sensitivity for endometriosis.

Clinical Management practices for associated pain and infertility

The management of endometriosis requires a multidisciplinary approach with [i] surgical diagnosis and debulking of disease load, [ii] hormonal treatment to suppress and delay recurrence and progression of disease, [iii] pain managment strategies best provided by a pain center clinic that develops individualized care plans and pelvic therapy. Symptomatic endometriosis is typically treated by surgical or medical treatment both equally effective. Despite the availability of treatments of associated pain, recurrence of endometriosis is not uncommon. Choice of medical treatments is done based on side effect profile, cost and personal preference. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and low-dose combined oral contraceptive pills (COCPs) such as ethyl estradiol and progestins are the first choice drugs [91]. If patients do not respond to NSAIDs in three months a second line of treatments is used which includes progestins (oral, injectable and intra-uterine), androgens, and gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRH) which reduce moderate to severe pain of endometriosis [9294].

Surgical techniques include excision or removal of endometrial implants, ablation of uterosacral nerves by employment of endocoagulation, electrocautery or laser treatment, presacral neurectomy, and hysterectomy with bilateral salpingooophorectomy [95, 96]. They have 50–80% success rate in reducing symptoms. Unfortunately, endometriosis recurs in 5 to 15% of cases even after hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy.

The primary benefit of surgery for infertility associated with endometriosis is to enhance the probability of natural conception [97]. Surgery for infertility or pain increases the spontaneous post-operative pregnancy rate [98]. On the other hand, surgery for endometrioma could lead to reduced ovarian function and the possible loss of the ovary. Therefore, the decision of surgery should be made carefully, particularly in women with advanced age, bilateral disease, impaired ovarian reserve, who had previous surgery for endometriomas, or long-term infertility, who are incompatible with natural conception due to tubal or male factors.

Future Perspectives

With the advancement of technologies and novel research findings, novel markers have been reported which can potentially be developed as therapeutic targets of endometriosis. In this class, immunomodulators such as interferon alpha 2 (IFN- α 2) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) – α inhibitors have been tested in animal models [99]. In one study [100], visceral sensitivity was measured in endometriosis patients and compared with patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and identified that patients who had pain associated with endometriosis had greater visceral hypersensitivity compared to IBS patients. This not only gives a way to differentially diagnose endometriosis patients but also provides a novel target for therapy of endometriosis. A recent study has shown that inflammation leads to elevation of components of signaling pathways such as mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) in endometriosis [101, 102] and could be a potential targets of therapy for endometriosis. A combination of unique and specific diagnostic biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets will pave a path for better early diagnosis and more effective treatment of endometriosis.

Conclusions

In summary, endometriosis is a debilitating disease that impacts the quality of life of adult and adolescent patients. Diagnostic delays are common and may lead to a decline in reproductive potential and fertility. A semi/non-invasive diagnostic biomarker would be a useful tool to identify patients early in the disease process and thus improving outcomes, including less pain and better fertility. A myriad of biomarkers have been associated with endometriosis; however, they are not sensitive and specific enough for use in screening. These potential biomarkers would reduce the cost of surgical intervention by early diagnosing the cases and thus improve clinical management of the disease. Therefore, more research is needed in this area of medicine.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest

Parveen Parasar, Pinar Ozcan, and Kathryn L. Terry declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as:

• Of importance •• Of major importance

  • 1.Giudice LC, Kao LC. Endometriosis. Lancet. 2004;364(9447):1789–99. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17403-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Nisolle M, Donnez J. Peritoneal endometriosis, ovarian endometriosis, and adenomyotic nodules of the rectovaginal septum are three different entities. Fertil Steril. 1997;68(4):585–96. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)00191-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Farland LV, Shah DK, Kvaskoff M, Zondervan K, Missmer SA. Epidemiological and Clinical Risk Factors for Endometriosis. In: D’Hooghe T, editor. Biomarkers for Endometriosis. Springer Science; New York: 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Anaf V, Simon P, El Nakadi I, Fayt I, Simonart T, Buxant F, et al. Hyperalgesia, nerve infiltration and nerve growth factor expression in deep adenomyotic nodules, peritoneal and ovarian endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1895–900. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.7.1895. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wang G, Tokushige N, Markham R, Fraser IS. Rich innervation of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:827–34. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Berkley KJ, Rapkin AJ, Papka RE. The pains of endometriosis. Science. 2005;308:1587–9. doi: 10.1126/science.1111445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bulun SE. Endometriosis. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 15;360(3):268–79. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra0804690. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ferguson BR, Bennington JL, Haber SL. Histochemistry of mucosubstances and histology of mixed mullerian pelvic lymph node glandular inclusions: evidence for histogenesis by mullerian metaplasia of coelomic epithelium. Obstet Gynecol. 1969;33:617–25. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sampson JA. Metastatic or embolic endometriosis due to menstrual dissemination of endometrial tissue into the venous circulation. Am J Pathol. 1927;3:93–109. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Carter JE. Combined hysteroscopic and laparoscopic findings in patients with chronic pelvic pain. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1994;2:43–47. doi: 10.1016/s1074-3804(05)80830-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11*.Nnoaham KE, Hummelshoj L, Webster P, d'Hooghe T, de Cicco Nardone F, de Cicco Nardone C, Jenkinson C, Kennedy SH, Zondervan KT. World Endometriosis Research Foundation Global Study of Women’s Health consortium. Impact of endometriosis on quality of life and work productivity: a multicenter study across ten countries. Fertil Steril. 2011 Aug;96(2):366–373.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.05.090. Epub 2011 Jun 30. This multi-site study reported that endometriosis is highly debilitating disease which affects socioeconomic quality and work life of patients. This is one of the articles which identified the diagnostic delay in women with endometriosis. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Greene R, Stratton P, Cleary SD, Ballweg ML, Sinaii N. Diagnostic experience among 4,334 women reporting surgically diagnosed endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:32–9. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.11.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Dun EC, Kho KA, Morozov VV, Kearney S, Zurawin JL, Nezhat CH. Endometriosis in adolescents. JSLS. 2015;19(2) doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2015.00019. pii: e2015.00019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Laufer MR. Current approaches to optimizing the treatment of endometriosis in adolescents. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2008;66(Suppl 1):19–27. doi: 10.1159/000148027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Sinaii N, Plumb K, Cotton L, Lambert A, Kennedy S, Zondervan K, Stratton P. Differences in characteristics among 1,000 women with endometriosis based on extent of disease. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(3):538–45. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.03.069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification of endometriosis: 1996. Fertil Steril. 1997;67:817–21. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81391-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17*.Missmer SA, Hankinson SE, Spiegelman D, Barbieri RL, Marshall LM, Hunter DJ. Incidence of Laparoscopically Confirmed Endometriosis by Demographic, Anthropometric, and Lifestyle Factors. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2004;160(8):784–96. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwh275. This study provides incidence measures of laproscopically-confirmed endometriosis in a large cohort of women which avoids biases inherent in hospital based studies or the misclassification of self-report. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Darrow SL, Vena JE, Batt RE, Zielezny MA, Michalek AM, Sharon S. Menstrual Cycle Characteristics and the Risk of Endometriosis. Epidemiology. 1993;4(2):135–42. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199303000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Matalliotakis I, Cakmak H, Fragouli Y, Goumenou A, Mahutte N, Arici A. Epidemiological characteristics in women with and without endometriosis in the Yale series. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2008;277(5):389–93. doi: 10.1007/s00404-007-0479-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Missmer S, Hankinson S, Spiegelman D, Barbieri R, Malspeis S, Willett W, Hunter D. Reproductive history and endometriosis among premenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(5 Pt 1):965–74. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000142714.54857.f8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Moen MH, Schei B. Epidemiology of endometriosis in a Norwegian county. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 1997;76(6):559–562. doi: 10.3109/00016349709024584. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cramer DW, Wilson E, Stillman RJ, et al. The relation of endometriosis to menstrual characteristics, smoking, and exercise. JAMA. 1986;255(14):1904–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Poindexter Ar. Epidemiology of endometriosis among parous women. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85(6):983–92. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00074-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Candiani G, Danesino V, Gastaldi A, Parazzini F, Ferraroni M. Reproductive and menstrual factors and risk of peritoneal and ovarian endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 1991;56(2):230–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Parazzini F. Risk factors for pelvic endometriosis in women with pelvic pain or infertility: Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dell’ endometriosi. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 1999;83(2):195–9. doi: 10.1016/s0301-2115(98)00332-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Peterson CM, Johnstone EB, Hammoud AO, Stanford JB, Varner MW, Kennedy A, Chen Z, Sun L, Fujimoto VY, Hediger ML, Buck Louis GM. Risk factors associated with endometriosis: importance of study population for characterizing disease in the ENDO Study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2013;208(6) doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.02.040. 451.e451–451.e411. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Vercellini P, Eskenazi B, Consonni D, Somigliana E, Parazzini F, Abbiati A, et al. Oral contraceptives and risk of endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(2):159–70. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmq042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Apter D, Reinilä M, Vihko R. Some endocrine characteristics of early menarche, a risk factor for breast cancer, are preserved into adulthood. International Journal of Cancer. 1989;44(5):783–7. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910440506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Macmahon B, Trichopoulos D, Brown J, Andersen AP, Cole P, Dewaard F, Kauraniemi T, Polychronopoulou A, Ravnihar B, Stormby N, Westlund K. Age at menarche, urine estrogens and breast cancer risk. International Journal of Cancer. 1982;30(4):427–31. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910300408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Moore JW, Key TJA, Wang DY, Bulbrook RD, Hayward JL, Takatani O. Blood concentrations of estradiol and sex hormone-binding globulin in relation to age at menarche in premenopausal British and Japanese women. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 1991;18(1):S47–S50. doi: 10.1007/BF02633527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Bernstein L, Pike M, Ross R, Judd H, Brown J, Henderson B. Estrogen and sex hormone-binding globulin levels in nulliparous and parous women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1985;74(4):741–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Dorgan JF, Reichman ME, Judd JT, Brown C, Longcope C, Schatzkin A, Campbell WS, Franz C, Kahle L, Taylor PR. Relationships of age and reproductive characteristics with plasma estrogens and androgens in premenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 1995;4(4):381–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Signorello LB, Harlow BL, Cramer DW, Spiegelman D, Hill JA. Epidemiologic determinants of endometriosis: A hospital-based case-control study. Annals of Epidemiology. 1997;7(4):267–74. doi: 10.1016/s1047-2797(97)00017-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Ferrero S, Anserini P, Remorgida V, Ragni N. Body mass index in endometriosis. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2005;121(1):94–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.11.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hediger ML, Hartnett HJ, Buck Louis GM. Association of endometriosis with body size and figure. Fertility and Sterility. 2005;84(5):1366–74. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.05.029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Parazzini F, Chiaffarino F, Surace M, Chatenoud L, Cipriani S, Chiantera V, Benzi G, Fedele L. Selected food intake and risk of endometriosis. Human Reproduction. 2004;19(8):1755–9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deh395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Vitonis AF, Baer HJ, Hankinson SE, Laufer MR, Missmer SA. A prospective study of body size during childhood and early adulthood and the incidence of endometriosis. Human Reproduction. 2010;25(5):1325–34. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Shah DK, Correia KF, Vitonis AF, Missmer SA. Body size and endometriosis: results from 20 years of follow-up within the Nurses’ Health Study II prospective cohort. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(7):1783–92. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Zondervan KT, Cardon LR, Kennedy SH. What makes a good case-control study? Design issues for complex traits such as endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2002 Jun;17(6):1415–23. doi: 10.1093/humrep/17.6.1415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Cramer DW, Missmer SA. The epidemiology of endometriosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002 Mar;955:11–22. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2002.tb02761.x. discussion 34–6, 396–406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Chiaffarino F, Parazzini F, La Vecchia C, Ricci E, Crosignani PG. Oral contraceptive use and benign gynecologic conditions. A review. Contraception. 1998 Jan;57(1):11–8. doi: 10.1016/s0010-7824(97)00201-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Vaughan S, Coward JI, Bast RC, Jr, Berchuck A, Berek JS, Brenton JD, Coukos G, Crum CC, Drapkin R, Etemadmoghadam D, Friedlander M, Gabra H, Kaye SB, Lord CJ, Lengyel E, Levine DA, McNeish IA, Menon U, Mills GB, Nephew KP, Oza AM, Sood AK, Stronach EA, Walczak H, Bowtell DD, Balkwill FR. Rethinking ovarian cancer: recommendations for improving outcomes. Nature reviews Cancer. 2011;11(10):719–25. doi: 10.1038/nrc3144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Bonocher CM, Montenegro ML, Rosa ESJC, Ferriani RA, Meola J. Endometriosis and physical exercises: a systematic review. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014;12:4. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-12-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sangi-Haghpeykar H, Poindexter Ar. Epidemiology of endometriosis among parous women. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85(6):983–92. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00074-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Kvaskoff M, Bijon A, Clavel-Chapelon F, Mesrine S, Boutron-Ruault MC. Childhood and adolescent exposures and the risk of endometriosis. Epidemiology. 2013;24(2):261–9. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3182806445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Wolff EF, Sun L, Hediger ML, Sundaram R, Peterson CM, Chen Z, et al. In utero exposures and endometriosis: the Endometriosis, Natural History, Disease, Outcome (ENDO) Study. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(3):790–5. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.11.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Buck Louis GM, Hediger ML, Pena JB. Intrauterine exposures and risk of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(12):3232–6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Baron JA, La Vecchia C, Levi F. The antiestrogenic effect of cigarette smoking in women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;162(2):502–14. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(90)90420-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Berube S, Marcoux S, Maheux R. Characteristics related to the prevalence of minimal or mild endometriosis in infertile women. Canadian Collaborative Group on Endometriosis. Epidemiology. 1998;9(5):504–10. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199809000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Grodstein F, Goldman MB, Ryan L, Cramer DW. Relation of female infertility to consumption of caffeinated beverages. Am J Epidemiol. 1993 Jun 15;137(12):1353–60. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Grodstein F, Goldman MB, Cramer DW. Infertility in women and moderate alcohol use. Am J Public Health. 1994;84(9):1429–32. doi: 10.2105/ajph.84.9.1429. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Heilier JF, Donnez J, Nackers F, Rousseau R, Verougstraete V, Rosenkranz K, et al. Environmental and host-associated risk factors in endometriosis and deep endometriotic nodules: a matched case-control study. Environ Res. 2007;103(1):121–9. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2006.04.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Matalliotakis IM, Arici A, Cakmak H, Goumenou AG, Koumantakis G, Mahutte NG. Familial aggregation of endometriosis in the Yale Series. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2008;278(6):507–11. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0644-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Parazzini F, Chiaffarino F, Surace M, Chatenoud L, Cipriani S, Chiantera V, et al. Selected food intake and risk of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2004;19(8):1755–9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deh395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Hemmings R, Rivard M, Olive DL, Poliquin-Fleury J, Gagne D, Hugo P, et al. Evaluation of risk factors associated with endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(6):1513–21. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.10.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Kern PA, Ranganathan S, Li C, Wood L, Ranganathan G. Adipose tissue tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-6 expression in human obesity and insulin resistance. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001;280(5):E745–751. doi: 10.1152/ajpendo.2001.280.5.E745. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Shephard RJ. Cytokine responses to physical activity, with particular reference to IL-6: sources, actions, and clinical implications. Crit Rev Immunol. 2002;22(3):165–182. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Weisberg SP, McCann D, Desai M, Rosenbaum M, Leibel RL, Ferrante AW., Jr Obesity is associated with macrophage accumulation in adipose tissue. J Clin Invest. 2003;112(12):1796–1808. doi: 10.1172/JCI19246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Hotamisligil GS, Arner P, Caro JF, Atkinson RL, Spiegelman BM. Increased adipose tissue expression of tumor necrosis factor-alpha in human obesity and insulin resistance. J Clin Invest. 1995;95(5):2409–2415. doi: 10.1172/JCI117936. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Baer DJ, Judd JT, Clevidence BA, Tracy RP. Dietary fatty acids affect plasma markers of inflammation in healthy men fed controlled diets: a randomized crossover study. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2004;79(6):969–73. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/79.6.969. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Missmer SA, Chavarro JE, Malspeis S, Bertone-Johnson ER, Hornstein MD, Spiegelman D, Barbieri RL, Willett WC, Hankinson SE. A prospective study of dietary fat consumption and endometriosis risk. Human Reproduction. 2010;25(6):1528–35. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Tsuchiya M, Miura T, Hanaoka T, Iwasaki M, Sasaki H, Tanaka T, Nakao H, Katoh T, Ikenoue T, Kabuto M, Tsugane S. Effect of soy isoflavones on endometriosis: interaction with estrogen receptor 2 gene polymorphism. Epidemiology. 2007 May;18(3):402–8. doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000257571.01358.f9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Merritt MA, Cramer DW, Missmer SA, Vitonis AF, Titus LJ, Terry KL. Dietary fat intake and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer by tumour histology. Br J Cancer. 2014;110(5):1392–1401. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Olsen CM, Bain CJ, Jordan SJ, Nagle CM, Green AC, Whiteman DC, Webb PM. Australian Ovarian Cancer Study G. Recreational physical activity and epithelial ovarian cancer: a case-control study, systematic review, and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16(11):2321–30. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Parazzini F, Viganò P, Candiani M, Fedele L. Diet and endometriosis risk: a literature review. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(4):323–36. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.12.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Kennedy S, Bergqvist A, Chapron C, D'Hooghe T, Dunselman G, Greb R, Hummelshoj L, Prentice A, Saridogan E. ESHRE Special Interest Group for Endometriosis and Endometrium Guideline Development Group. ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(10):2698–704. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dei135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Moore J, Copley S, Morris J, Lindsell D, Golding S, Kennedy S. A systematic review of the accuracy of ultrasound in the diagnosis of endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;20:630–4. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2002.00862.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Bazot M, Thomassin I, Hourani R, Cortez A, Darai E. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for deep pelvic endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;24:180–5. doi: 10.1002/uog.1108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Bazot M, Lafont C, Rouzier R, Roseau G, Thomassin-Naggara I, Darai E. Diagnostic accuracy of physical examination, transvaginal sonography, rectal endoscopic sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose deep infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1825–33. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Dessole S, Farina M, Rubattu G, Cosmi E, Ambrosini G, Nardelli GB. Sonovaginography is a new technique for assessing rectovaginal endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:1023–7. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04952-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Dunselman GA, Vermeulen N, Becker C, Calhaz-Jorge C, D'Hooghe T, De Bie B, Heikinheimo O, Horne AW, Kiesel L, Nap A, Prentice A, Saridogan E, Soriano D, Nelen W. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(3):400–12. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72**.Nisenblat V, Bossuyt PM, Shaikh R, Farquhar C, Jordan V, Scheffers CS, Mol BW, Johnson N, Hull ML. Blood biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 1;(5):CD012179. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012179. This is a comprehensive review of potential non-invasive tests (primarily blood biomarkers) for endometriosis. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73**.Fassbender A, Vodolazkaia A, Saunders P, Lebovic D, Waelkens E, De Moor B, D'Hooghe T. Biomarkers of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2013;15;99(4):1135–45. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.01.097. This review discusses the diagnostic performance of peripheral blood biomarkers and endometrial nerve density in identifying women with endometriosis. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Vodolazkaia A, El-Aalamat Y, Popovic D, Mihalyi A, Bossuyt X, Kyama CM, Fassbender A, Bokor A, Schols D, Huskens D, Meuleman C, Peeraer K, Tomassetti C, Gevaert O, Waelkens E, Kasran A, De Moor B, D'Hooghe TM. Evaluation of a panel of 28 biomarkers for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(9):2698–711. doi: 10.1093/humrep/des234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.May KE, Villar J, Kirtley S, Kennedy SH, Becker CM. Endometrial alterations in endometriosis: a systematic review of putative biomarkers. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(5):637–53. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Pan Q, Luo X, Toloubeydokhti T, Chegini N. The expression profile of micro-RNA in endometrium and endometriosis and the influence of ovarian steroids on their expression. Mol Hum Reprod. 2007;13:797–806. doi: 10.1093/molehr/gam063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Othman Eel D, Hornung D, Al-Hendy A. Biomarkers of endometriosis. Expert Opin Med Diagn. 2008;2:741–52. doi: 10.1517/17530059.2.7.741. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Lessey BA, Young SL. Integrins and other cell adhesion molecules in endometrium and endometriosis. Semin Reprod Endocrinol. 1997;15(3):291–9. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1068759. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Witz CA. Cell adhesion molecules and endometriosis. Semin Reprod Med. 2003 May;21(2):173–82. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-41324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Umezawa M, Saito Y, Tanaka-Hattori N, Takeda K, Ihara T, Sugamata M. Expression profile of extracellular matrix and adhesion molecules in the development of endometriosis in a mouse model. Reprod Sci. 2012 Dec;19(12):1365–72. doi: 10.1177/1933719112450340. Epub 2012 Aug 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Taylor RN, Lebovic DI, Mueller MD. Angiogenic factors in endometriosis. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2002;955:89–100. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2002.tb02769.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Becker CM, D'Amato RJ. Angiogenesis and antiangiogenic therapy in endometriosis. Microvasc Res. 2007;74:121–30. doi: 10.1016/j.mvr.2007.04.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Kyama CM, Mihalyi A, Gevaert O, Waelkens E, Simsa P, Van de Plas R, et al. Evaluation of endometrial biomarkers for semi-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:1338–43. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Chan RWS, et al. Clonogenicity of human endometrial epithelial and stromal cells. Biol Reprod. 2004;70:1738–50. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.103.024109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Du H, Taylor HS. Contribution of bone marrow-derived stem cells to endometrium and endometriosis. Stem Cells. 2007;25:2082–6. doi: 10.1634/stemcells.2006-0828. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Tai MH, Chang CC, Kiupel M, Webster JD, Olson LK, Trosko JE. Oct4 expression in adult human stem cells: evidence in support of the stem cell theory of carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis. 2005;26:495–502. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgh321. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Painter JN, Anderson CA, Nyholt DR, Macgregor S, Lin J, Lee SH, Lambert A, Zhao ZZ, Roseman F, Guo Q, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies a locus at 7p15.2 associated with endometriosis. Nat Genet. 2011;43:51–4. doi: 10.1038/ng.731. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Browne AS, Yu J, Huang RP, Francisco AM, Sidell N, Taylor RN. Proteomic identification of neurotrophins in the eutopic endometrium of women with endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:713–9. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.027. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Liu H, Wang J, Wang H, Tang N, Li Y, Zhang Y, Hao T. Correlation between matrix metalloproteinase-9 and endometriosis. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015 Oct 1;8(10):13399–404. eCollection 2015. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Yang H, Liu J, Fan Y, Guo Q, Ge L, Yu N, Zheng X, Dou Y, Zheng S. Associations between various possible promoter polymorphisms of MMPs genes and endometriosis risk: a meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Oct;205:174–88. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.08.015. Epub 2016 Aug 12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Zito G, Luppi S, Giolo E, Martinelli M, Venturin I, Di Lorenzo G, Ricci G. Medical treatments for endometriosis-associated pelvic pain. Biomed Res Int. 2014;014:191967. doi: 10.1155/2014/191967. Epub 2014 Aug 7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Angioni S, Cofelice V, Pontis A, Tinelli R, Socolov R. New trends of progestins treatment of endometriosis. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014 Nov;30(11):769–73. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2014.950646. Epub 2014 Aug 21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Andres Mde P, Lopes LA, Baracat EC, Podgaec S. Dienogest in the treatment of endometriosis: systematic review. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;292(3):523–9. doi: 10.1007/s00404-015-3681-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Granese R, Perino A, Calagna G, Saitta S, De Franciscis P, Colacurci N, Triolo O, Cucinella G. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue or dienogest plus estradiol valerate to prevent pain recurrence after laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis: a multi-center randomized trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(6):637–45. doi: 10.1111/aogs.12633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Champaneria R, Abedin P, Daniels J, Balogun M, Khan KS. Ultrasound scan and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review comparing test accuracy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(11):1374–84. doi: 10.3109/00016349.2010.512061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Posadzka E, Jach R, Pityński K, Jablonski MJ. Treatment efficacy for pain complaints in women with endometriosis of the lesser pelvis after laparoscopic electroablation vs. CO2 laser ablation. Lasers Med Sci. 2015;30(1):147–52. doi: 10.1007/s10103-014-1630-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.de Ziegler Dominique, Borghese Bruno, Chapron Charles. Endometriosis and infertility: pathophysiology and management. Lancet. 2010;376:730–8. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60490-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Jacobson TZ, Duffy JM, Barlow D, Farquhar C, Koninckx PR, Olive D. Laparoscopic surgery for subfertility associated with endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:CD001398. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001398.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.D'Hooghe TM, Nugent NP, Cuneo S, Chai DC, Deer F, Debrock S, Kyama CM, Mihalyi A, Mwenda JM. Recombinant human TNFRSF1A (r-hTBP1) inhibits the development of endometriosis in baboons: a prospective, randomized, placebo- and drug-controlled study. Biol Reprod. 2006;74(1):131–6. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.105.043349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Issa B, Onon TS, Agrawal A, Shekhar C, Morris J, Hamdy S, Whorwell PJ. Visceral hypersensitivity in endometriosis: a new target for treatment? Gut. 2012;61(3):367–72. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101**.McKinnon BD, Kocbek V, Nirgianakis K, Bersinger NA, Mueller MD. Kinase signaling pathways in endometriosis: potential targets for non-hormonal therapeutics. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22(3) doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmv060. pii: dmv060. Epub 2016 Jan 5. A recent report describing the role of kinase signaling pathways in endometriosis and their use as a potential therapeutic targets for endometriosis. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Santulli P, Marcellin L, Tosti C, Chouzenoux S, Cerles O, Borghese B, Batteux F, Chapron C. MAP kinases and the inflammatory signaling cascade as targets for the treatment of endometriosis? Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2015;19(11):1465–83. doi: 10.1517/14728222.2015.1090974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES