Fertility Preservation in Endometriosis: Does Patient Symptomatology Affect the Extent of the Ovarian Response?

article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 5 in-corpus citations
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06+body, 2026-06-07

This study found a negative association between the number of endometriosis symptoms and oocytes vitrified, with surgical intervention only partly mediating this relationship.

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

AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 · read from full text

This observational cross-sectional study (July 2017–May 2020) examined women with endometriosis attending an endometriosis clinic who underwent fertility preservation, using online symptom questionnaires cross-referenced with electronic charts and analyses linking patient/cycle characteristics to oocyte vitrification outcomes. Across a cohort with a mean age of 35.2 years, the number of oocytes vitrified per patient was significantly and positively correlated with AMH (r=+0.472, p=0.006) and showed a significant negative association with the number of reported clinical symptoms, with the strongest correlations also involving clinical characteristics (r values around −0.44 to −0.50). Mediation analysis suggested that prior surgical intervention accounted for only part of the relationship between symptom burden and ovarian response (estimated mediation proportion 17%), with a reported causality estimate of −0.300 (95% CI [0.15, 1.905], p=0.05). The paper’s main limitation is its cross-sectional design, which constrains causal inference about symptom severity, treatment history, and ovarian response. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — it tests whether patient symptomatology relates to the ovarian response measured by quantity of vitrified oocytes during fertility preservation.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Full text 10,456 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

This study is to identify factors and patient symptomatology affecting ovarian response in women with endometriosis who seek fertility preservation. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2017 to May 2020 at a tertiary university-affiliated medical center. We included patients who were treated in the endometriosis clinic and underwent fertility preservation. Patients completed an online questionnaire that was cross-referenced with electronic charts. An analysis related to patient data and fertility preservation cycles and a mediation analysis were performed. The mean patient age at time of fertility preservation was 35.2 (± 4.9) years. The mean accumulated number of oocytes vitrified per patient was 16.7 (± 12.1) oocytes. The correlation coefficient assessed between the number of oocytes vitrified per cycle and AMH was significantly positive at +0.472, p = 0.006. The examined reported symptoms were lethargy, chronic pelvic pain, dyschezia, dyspareunia, bowel-associated symptoms, and urinary tract symptoms. The number of oocytes vitrified correlated with the number of reported symptoms and clinical characteristics at − 0.497, p = 0.0001, and − 0.442, p = 0.0001, respectively. In a mediation analysis, the potential causality of surgical intervention in the relationship between the number of symptoms and ovarian response was − 0.300 (95% CI [0.15, 1.905], p = 0.05), and the calculated proportion of mediation was estimated to be 17%. We observed a significant negative association between the number of clinical symptoms and the quantity of vitrified oocytes. This relationship was only partly associated with prior surgical intervention. AMH was found to have the highest correlation with treatment success in patients with endometriosis undergoing fertility preservation. Similar content being viewed by others Data Availability Not applicable. Code Availability Not applicable.

References

Koninckx PR, Ussia A, Adamyan L, Wattiez A, Gomel V, Martin DC. Pathogenesis of endometriosis: the genetic/epigenetic theory. Fertil Steril. 2019;111(2):327–40. Santulli P, Collinet P, Fritel X, Canis M, d’Argent EM, Chauffour C, et al. Management of assisted reproductive technology (ART) in case of endometriosis related infertility: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018;46(3):373–5. Llarena NC, Falcone T, Flyckt RL. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis. Clin Med Insights Reprod Health. 2019;13:1179558119873386. Evans MB, Decherney AH. Fertility and endometriosis. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;60(3):497–502. Lantsberg D, Fernando S, Cohen Y, Rombauts L. The role of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(2):362–72. Barri PN, Coroleu B, Tur R, Barri-Soldevila PN, Rodríguez I. Endometriosis-associated infertility: surgery and IVF, a comprehensive therapeutic approach. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21(2):179–85. Lima ML, Martins WP, Coelho Neto MA, Nastri CO, Ferriani RA, Navarro PA. Assessment of ovarian reserve by antral follicle count in ovaries with endometrioma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(2):239–42. Muzii L, Di Tucci C, Di Feliciantonio M, Marchetti C, Perniola G, Panici PB. The effect of surgery for endometrioma on ovarian reserve evaluated by antral follicle count: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(10):2190–8. Nieweglowska D, Hajdyla-Banas I, Pitynski K, Banas T, Grabowska O, Juszczyk G, et al. Age-related trends in anti-Mullerian hormone serum level in women with unilateral and bilateral ovarian endometriomas prior to surgery. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:128. Ozgur K, Bulut H, Berkkanoglu M, Coetzee K. Reproductive outcomes of segmented in vitro fertilization in patients diagnosed with endometriomas. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;25(1):105–10. Cobo A, Giles J, Paolelli S, Pellicer A, Remohí J, García-Velasco JA. Oocyte vitrification for fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: an observational study. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(4):836–44. Somigliana E, Vercellini P. Fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: speculations are finally over, the time for real data is initiated. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(4):765–6. Practice bulletin no. 114: management of endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):223–36. Chronic Pelvic Pain. ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 218. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(3):e98–e109. Agarwal SK, Chapron C, Giudice LC, Laufer MR, Leyland N, Missmer SA, et al. Clinical diagnosis of endometriosis: a call to action. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(4):354 e1-e12. Fuldeore MJ, Soliman AM. Prevalence and symptomatic burden of diagnosed endometriosis in the United States: national estimates from a cross-sectional survey of 59,411 women. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2017;82(5):453–61. Saha R, Marions L, Tornvall P. Validity of self-reported endometriosis and endometriosis-related questions in a Swedish female twin cohort. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(1):174–8 e2. Rock JA. The revised American Fertility Society classification of endometriosis: reproducibility of scoring. ZOLADEX Endometriosis Study Group. Fertil Steril. 1995;63(5):1108–10. de Ziegler D, Borghese B, Chapron C. Endometriosis and infertility: pathophysiology and management. Lancet. 2010;376(9742):730–8. Sanchez AM, Vigano P, Somigliana E, Panina-Bordignon P, Vercellini P, Candiani M. The distinguishing cellular and molecular features of the endometriotic ovarian cyst: from pathophysiology to the potential endometrioma-mediated damage to the ovary. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(2):217–30. Kitajima M, Dolmans MM, Donnez O, Masuzaki H, Soares M, Donnez J. Enhanced follicular recruitment and atresia in cortex derived from ovaries with endometriomas. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(4):1031–7. Carrillo L, Seidman DS, Cittadini E, Meirow D. The role of fertility preservation in patients with endometriosis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33(3):317–23. Younis JS, Shapso N, Fleming R, Ben-Shlomo I, Izhaki I. Impact of unilateral versus bilateral ovarian endometriotic cystectomy on ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2019;25(3):375–91. Hirokawa W, Iwase A, Goto M, Takikawa S, Nagatomo Y, Nakahara T, et al. The post-operative decline in serum anti-Mullerian hormone correlates with the bilaterality and severity of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(4):904–10. Haas D, Shebl O, Shamiyeh A, Oppelt P. The rASRM score and the Enzian classification for endometriosis: their strengths and weaknesses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013;92(1):3–7. Schliep KC, Mumford SL, Peterson CM, Chen Z, Johnstone EB, Sharp HT, et al. Pain typology and incident endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(10):2427–38. Rocha TP, Andres MP, Carmona F, Baracat EC, Abrão MS. Deep endometriosis: the involvement of multiple pelvic compartments is associated with more severe pain symptoms and infertility. Reprod Sci. 2022. Scholl B, Bersinger NA, Kuhn A, Mueller MD. Correlation between symptoms of pain and peritoneal fluid inflammatory cytokine concentrations in endometriosis. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2009;25(11):701–6. Da Broi MG, Navarro PA. Oxidative stress and oocyte quality: ethiopathogenic mechanisms of minimal/mild endometriosis-related infertility. Cell Tissue Res. 2016;364(1):1–7. Opøien HK, Fedorcsak P, Polec A, Stensen MH, Åbyholm T, Tanbo T. Do endometriomas induce an inflammatory reaction in nearby follicles? Hum Reprod. 2013;28(7):1837–45. La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(2):113–30. Garavaglia E, Sala C, Taccagni G, Traglia M, Barbieri C, Ferrari S, et al. Fertility preservation in endometriosis patients: anti-Müllerian hormone is a reliable marker of the ovarian follicle density. Front Surg. 2017;4:40. Cobo A, Garcia-Velasco JA, Coello A, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohi J. Oocyte vitrification as an efficient option for elective fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(3):755–64 e8. Bakkensen JB, Flannagan KSJ, Mumford SL, Hutchinson AP, Cheung EO, Moreno PI, et al. A SART data cost-effectiveness analysis of planned oocyte cryopreservation versus in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy considering ideal family size. Fertil Steril. 2022;118(5):875–84. Hans Evers JL. Is adolescent endometriosis a progressive disease that needs to be diagnosed and treated? Hum Reprod. 2013;28(8):2023. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Zanconato G, Raffaelli R, Berlanda N. Is rectovaginal endometriosis a progressive disease? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(5):1539–42. Kasapoglu I, Ata B, Uyaniklar O, Seyhan A, Orhan A, Yildiz Oguz S, et al. Endometrioma-related reduction in ovarian reserve (ERROR): a prospective longitudinal study. Fertil Steril. 2018;110(1):122–7. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Comparison of pregnancy rates for poor responders using IVF with mild ovarian stimulation versus conventional IVF: a guideline. Fertil Steril 2018;109(6):993-9. Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Ethics declarations Ethics Approval This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of Tel Aviv Medical Center IRB approval number: 0149-20-TLV. Consent to Participate Not applicable. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing interests. Additional information Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Rights and permissions Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. About this article Cite this article Fouks, Y., Goaz, S., Ryley, D. et al. Fertility Preservation in Endometriosis: Does Patient Symptomatology Affect the Extent of the Ovarian Response?. Reprod. Sci. 30, 2439–2448 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-023-01180-5 Received: Accepted: Published: Version of record: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-023-01180-5

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-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

mesh:D004715endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis

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 (43)

Cited by (5)

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: 2026-06-04T00:34:07.146298+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK