Chronic Pelvic Pain: Assessment, Evaluation, and Objectivation

Maria Beatrice Passavanti, Vincenzo Pota, Pasquale Sansone, Caterina Aurilio, Lorenzo De Nardis, Maria Caterina Pace
In: Pain Research and Treatment · 2017 · vol. 2017 , pp. 1–15 · doi:10.1155/2017/9472925 · PMID:29359045 · W2769815984
review OA: hybrid CC0 ⤵ 12 in-corpus citations
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This review examines tools for assessing and objectifying chronic pelvic pain (CPP) and chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS), highlighting neuroimaging findings that offer insights into their pathophysiology and diagnostic potential.

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

Abstract

Chronic Pelvic Pain (CPP) and Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CPPS) have a significant impact on men and women of reproductive and nonreproductive age, with a considerable burden on overall quality of life (QoL) and on psychological, functional, and behavioural status. Moreover, diagnostic and therapeutic difficulties are remarkable features in many patients. Therefore evaluation, assessment and objectivation tools are often necessary to properly address each patient and consequently his/her clinical needs. Here we review the different tools for pain assessment, evaluation, and objectivation; specific features regarding CPP/CPPS will be highlighted. Also, recent findings disclosed with neuroimaging investigations will be reviewed as they provide new insights into CPP/CPPS pathophysiology and may serve as a tool for CPP assessment and objectivation.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

chronic_pelvic_pain

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 (100)

Cited by (12)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK