Chapter III
OA: green
CC0
⚙
AI-generated summary
by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-11
ⓘ
In a prospective cohort of patients with symptomatic endometrioma, surgical management yielded greater pain reduction and superior quality of life scores compared to medication alone at six months.
⚙
AI-generated deep summary
by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-08
· read from full text
ⓘ
The provided text is not a biomedical research paper but rather an error message from a website security system called Anubis. It explains that the server uses a Proof-of-Work scheme to prevent aggressive AI scraping and requests users to disable browser plugins like JShelter to access the content. The text describes technical measures for bot mitigation rather than presenting scientific findings or clinical data. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.
Abstract
Study question What is the effectiveness of surgery compared to medication for improving pain and quality of life (QoL) in symptomatic patients with endometrioma? Summary answer In patients with symptomatic endometrioma, a surgical treatment strategy, with or without adjunctive hormonal treatment, was associated with greater pain reduction and better outcomes in several QoL domains than medication alone after six months. What is known already Endometrioma occur in 17–44% of patients with endometriosis and are frequently associated with dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia and pelvic pain. While treatment options include surgery and medication, prospective studies to guide clinical practice are lacking. Study design, size, duration This multicentre study, initially designed as randomized clinical trial (RCT) (n=22), continued as prospective cohort (n=202) due to patient preferences. In total, 224 patients (124 surgery, 100 medication) were recruited between May 2019-May 2023. Participants/materials, setting, methods We recruited patients with ovarian endometrioma of ≥3cm and pain. Those with deep endometriosis (DE) were not eligible. Surgical approach was guideline-based. Medication comprised hormonal therapy and/or analgesics. In both groups, continuation or initiation of (hormonal) medication was allowed. The primary outcome was ≥30% pain reduction (numeric rating scale: NRS) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were, among others, change in NRS and QoL (EHP-30). Treatment effects were estimated using augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW), targeting the average treatment effect and reported as adjusted risk difference (RD) and marginal odds ratio (OR). Main results and the role of chance After six months, ≥30% pain reduction was achieved in 76% after surgery versus 62% after medication (marginal OR: 1.83, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.3, P=0.047). Pelvic pain and dysmenorrhea scores at six months were lower following a surgical management, whereas no statistically significant difference was observed for dyspareunia. QoL improved in both groups, favoring surgery in four subscales. Limitations, reasons for caution The RCT was prematurely discontinued after 22 inclusions, resulting in a predominantly patient preference cohort with potential for residual confounding. Specific surgical and medical treatment strategies were heterogeneous, and follow-up was limited to six months. Wider implications of the findings The observed benefits of surgical management, with or without adjunctive medication, at six months should be considered alongside patient preferences and the benefits and risks of both treatment strategies. It remains unclear whether these effects are sustained over time. Key words Endometrioma, pain, quality of life, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia
Full text
1,083 characters
· extracted from
oa-html
· click to expand
Beveiligde verbinding wordt gecontroleerd...
Loading...
You are seeing this because the administrator of this website has set up Anubis to protect the server against the scourge of AI companies aggressively scraping websites. This can and does cause downtime for the websites, which makes their resources inaccessible for everyone.
Anubis is a compromise. Anubis uses a Proof-of-Work scheme in the vein of Hashcash, a proposed proof-of-work scheme for reducing email spam. The idea is that at individual scales the additional load is ignorable, but at mass scraper levels it adds up and makes scraping much more expensive.
Ultimately, this is a placeholder solution so that more time can be spent on fingerprinting and identifying headless browsers (EG: via how they do font rendering) so that the challenge proof of work page doesn't need to be presented to users that are much more likely to be legitimate.
Please note that Anubis requires the use of modern JavaScript features that plugins like JShelter will disable. Please disable JShelter or other such plugins for this domain.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
⚙
Ask this paper
AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text
· source: oa-html
ⓘ
Citation neighborhood
(no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet.
This is a recent paper (2026) — citers
typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference
graph may still be filling in.
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-10-14T06:01:35.214979+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK