Objective: To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery for severe endometriosis in the UK at a national, regional and centre-level. Design: Population-based national cohort study. Population: All women undergoing endometriosis surgery requiring dissection of the pararectal space in the UK from 2017 to 2020 inclusive. Methods: The British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE) collects data nationally on all operations for severe endometriosis which involve dissection of the pararectal space. Annual audits of this database were obtained from the BSGE. Publicly available data on COVID-19 deaths and population were obtained from the UK Office for National Statistics. Main outcome measures: Numbers of annual BSGE-registered endometriosis operations. Results: A total of 5916 operations were performed. The number of operations decreased by 49.4% overall between 2019 and 2020. The number of endometriosis centres remained the same, however the median number of operations per centre decreased from 21 to 12.5, with a median percentage decrease at each centre of 51.0% (IQR 29.4% – 75.0%). There was no significant change in the type of surgery performed. All 11 administrative regions of Great Britain had reduced numbers of BSGE-registered operations in 2020 compared with the average for 2017-2019, with a median 56.6% decrease (range 6.13% - 68.62%). Regional reduction in operations was significantly correlated with COVID-19 death rates (r=0.557, 95% CI of r 0.048 – 1.00, p=0.037). Conclusions: There has been a dramatic fall in the number of operations for severe endometriosis in Britain during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fertility preservation for women with ovarian endometriosis: it is time to adopt it as routine practice

Objective To assess the prevalence of endometriosis using pelvic ultrasound examination in women attending for early pregnancy care Design Prospective observational study. Setting A dedicated early pregnancy unit. Population We included 1341 consecutive women who attended for an early pregnancy assessment and had transvaginal ultrasound scans performed by a single clinician. Methods In addition to the presence of endometriosis on ultrasound scan, we collected data on patient demographics and concurrent gynaecological conditions. Data analysis was performed using logistic regression and multivariate analysis. Main outcome measures The prevalence of endometriosis in addition to possible associations with demographic and clinical variables. Results The prevalence of endometriosis in women attending the early pregnancy unit was 4.9% (95% CI 3.8 – 6.2); In 33/66 (50%, 95% CI 37.9 – 62.1) women with endometriosis, this was a new diagnosis made for the first time during their early pregnancy scan. The presence of endometriosis was strongly associated with congenital uterine anomalies (p < 0.001; OR 5.69, 95% CI 2.17 – 14.9) and uterine fibroids (p = 0.004; OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.31, 4.28). Conclusions Endometriosis is present in nearly 5% of women attending for early pregnancy assessment. In half of the women with endometriosis, the diagnosis was made for the first time during pregnancy. We propose that ultrasound may be a useful tool for the detection of endometriosis and to identify pregnant women who may benefit from specialist antenatal care. Funding No funding was obtained for this work. Keywords Endometriosis, Prevalence, Pregnancy, Ultrasonography

Endometriosis is often described as a chronic condition. Surgical or medical treatment approaches do not cure it, and recurrence of the disease or its symptoms is common. Medical treatment is usually used to achieve symptomatic control whilst surgery aims to eliminate the visible lesions. However, recurrence is frequently seen even after very radical surgery.Endometriomas are frequently used for diagnosis and as a marker of recurrence due their easy recognition on imaging. In this issue of BJOG, Wattanayingcharoenchai et al (BJOG 2020 xxxx) present their systematic review and network metaanalysis (NMA) on the efficacy of postoperative medical therapies in reducing endometrioma recurrence with some mixed messages. They conclude that evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) do not support the use of postoperative hormonal therapies, whereas data from cohort studies indicate a significant protective effect of levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) followed by dienogest, gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) + LNG-IUS, continuous and cyclical oral contraceptives (OC). The most effective postoperative therapy (although non-significant) was GnRHa+LNG-IUS, followed by continuous OC and GnRHa based on RCTs.Direct meta-analysis of RCTs in the Wattanayingcharoenchai et al. article indicate an approximately 40-50% reduction with OCs but this remained statistically non-significant. This finding is in contrast to an earlier meta-analysis (Vercellini et al. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92:8-16) which concluded that the postoperative OC use dramatically reduced the risk of endometrioma recurrence and international guidelines that recommend use of hormonal contraceptives for the secondary prevention of endometrioma (Dunselman et al. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:400-12). So what are we to believe and what should we advise women affected by endometriosis to do?There is a wide variation in the design of studies on which metaanalyses and the current NMA are based on in terms of inclusion criteria, duration of treatment and definition of recurrence. Some studies allocate the participants on the basis of their disease stage without taking the preoperative cyst size and bilaterality into account. The definition of a ‘recurrent cyst’ varies from ‘no definition’ to endometrioma of > 1 cm or >3 cm. These introduce significant heterogeneity which potentially compromise the validity of any meta-analysis. Furthermore, there is also a conceptual difference between using medical treatment (e.g. GnRHa) for 3-6 months postoperatively and continuing with therapy (e.g. hormonal contraceptives) in the long term and assessing the recurrence rates at 1-5 years. In fact the ESHRE guideline (Dunselman et al.) proposed distinguishing postoperative adjunctive treatment of < 6 months that aims to improve the outcome of surgery and longer treatments with the intention to reduce recurrences (secondary prevention). The former may have a significant side effect profile whereas the latter has a good safety record.It is very plausible that suppression of ovulation and reducing/eliminating menstrual flow in the long term would reduce recurrences. The current literature is too heterogeneous and fragmented to confirm or refute this. Properly designed large scale studies with the required power are still required. The Pre-Empt trial which is currently ongoing in United Kingdom may give some of the answers.Disclosure of interest: None. A completed disclosure of interest form is available to view online as supporting information.