The 2013 EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain: is management of chronic pelvic pain a habit, a philosophy, or a science? 10 years of development

Daniel S Engeler, Daniel Engeler, A. Baranowski, Andrew P Baranowski, Paulo Dinis-Oliveira, Paulo Dinis, Suzy Elneil, Sohier Elneil, John Hughes, Embert J. Messelink, Arndt van Ophoven, Amanda C Williams, Amanda C de C Williams, European Association of Urology
European urology · 2013 · vol. 64(3) , pp. 431–439 · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.035 · PMID:23684447 · W2171649814
Systematic review / meta-analysis OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 59 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This paper reviews the development of the 2013 European Association of Urology guidelines on chronic pelvic pain, questioning whether its management is a habit, a philosophy, or a science.

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

Abstract

CONTEXT: Progress in the science of pain has led pain specialists to move away from an organ-centred understanding of pain located in the pelvis to an understanding based on the mechanism of pain and integrating, as far as possible, psychological, social, and sexual dimensions of the problem. This change is reflected in all areas, from taxonomy through treatment. However, deciding what is adequate investigation to rule out treatable disease before moving to this way of engaging with the patient experiencing pain is a complex process, informed by pain expertise as much as by organ-based medical knowledge. OBJECTIVE: To summarise the evolving changes in the management of patients with chronic pelvic pain by referring to the 2012 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on chronic pelvic pain. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The working panel highlights some of the most important aspects of the management of patients with chronic pelvic pain emerging in recent years in the context of the EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain. The guidelines were completely updated in 2012 based on a systematic review of the literature from online databases from 1995 to 2011. According to this review, levels of evidence and grades of recommendation were added to the text. A full version of the guidelines is available at the EAU office or Web site (www.uroweb.org). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The previously mentioned issues are explored in this paper, which refers throughout to dilemmas for the physician and treatment team as well as to the need to inform and engage the patient in a collaborative empirical approach to pain relief and rehabilitation. These issues are exemplified in two case histories. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pelvic pain persisting after appropriate treatment requires a different approach focussing on pain. This approach integrates the medical, psychosocial, and sexual elements of care to engage the patient in a collaborative journey towards self-management.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

chronic_pelvic_pain

MeSH descriptors

Chronic Pain Pain Management Pelvic Pain Chronic Pain Chronic Pain Chronic Pain Chronic Pain Combined Modality Therapy Delivery of Health Care, Integrated Delivery of Health Care, Integrated Evidence-Based Medicine Evidence-Based Medicine Humans Pain Management Pain Management Pain Measurement Pain Measurement Patient Care Team Patient Care Team Pelvic Pain

Citation neighborhood (2-hop)

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. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]

References (64)

Cited by (50)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:11:59.585523+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK