Surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways in dysmenorrhea: a systematic review of effectiveness

Pallavi Latthe, P M Latthe, M L Proctor, Michelle Proctor, C M Farquhar, Cindy Farquhar, Neil Johnson, N Johnson, Khalid S. Khan, K S Khan
Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2007 · vol. 86(1) , pp. 4–15 · doi:10.1080/00016340600753117 · PMID:17230282 · W2026599485
review OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 23 in-corpus citations
🔓 Open OA copy View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-10 ⓘ

This systematic review of nine randomized controlled trials found laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation superior to no treatment for primary dysmenorrhea but inferior to presacral neurectomy, which also improved secondary dysmenorrhea pain with more adverse events.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of surgical interruption of pelvic nerve pathways in primary and secondary dysmenorrhea. Data sources. The Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (9 June 2004), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to Nov. 2003), EMBASE (1980 to Nov. 2003), CINAHL (1982 to Oct. 2003), MetaRegister of Controlled Trials, the citation lists of review articles and included trials, and contact with the corresponding author of each included trial. REVIEW METHODS: The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of uterosacral nerve ablation or presacral neurectomy (both open and laparoscopic procedures) for the treatment of dysmenorrhea. The main outcome measures were pain relief and adverse effects. Two reviewers extracted data on characteristics of the study quality and the population, intervention, and outcome independently. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials were included in the systematic review. There were two trials with open presacral neurectomy; all other trials used laparoscopic techniques. For the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea, laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation at 12 months was better when compared to a control or no treatment (OR 6.12; 95% CI 1.78-21.03). The comparison of laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation with presacral neurectomy for primary dysmenorrhea showed that at 12 months follow-up, presacral neurectomy was more effective (OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.03-0.32). In secondary dysmenorrhea, along with laparoscopic surgical treatment of endometriosis, the addition of laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation did not improve the pain relief (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.43-1.39), while presacral neurectomy did (OR 3.14; 95% CI 1.59-6.21). Adverse events were more common for presacral neurectomy than procedures without presacral neurectomy (OR 14.6; 95% CI 5-42.5). CONCLUSION: The evidence for nerve interruption in the management of dysmenorrhea is limited. Methodologically sound and sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials are needed.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

mesh:D004412endometriosisdysmenorrhea

MeSH descriptors

Dysmenorrhea Pelvis Denervation Denervation Dysmenorrhea Female Humans Laparoscopy Laparoscopy Pelvis Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (40)

Cited by (23)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-05-13T22:15:06.633332+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK