Towards a uniform classification of endometriosis: a comparative review and evidence mapping of current classification systems

Abstract Purpose To compare current endometriosis classification systems across clinically relevant domains and to identify which components may be used for a single internationally accepted classification. Methods A PubMed search was performed up to December 31, 2025, to identify publications on the revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification (rASRM) and endometriosis classifications introduced after 2000 (#Enzian, AAGL, EFI, UBESS, dPEI, Endo-Stage MRI, NMS-E, VNESS, FOATIaRVS, Chapron), excluding case reports. The full classification names as well as their abbreviations were used as search terms. The included systems were evaluated across pre-defined domains: descriptive anatomical mapping, pain, fertility, quality of life, surgical complexity, surgical duration, complication risk, non-invasive applicability, treatment guidance, disease progression, postoperative recurrence, and reproducibility. Results No currently available classification performed well across all domains. #Enzian provided the most comprehensive anatomical-descriptive framework. EFI remained the best-validated tool for predicting spontaneous conception after surgery. AAGL, UBESS, dPEI, and Endo-Stage MRI were most informative for operative complexity and surgical risk stratification. In contrast, correlations with pain, quality of life, disease progression, and treatment response were generally weak or inconsistent across systems. Evidence for recurrence prediction was limited, and reproducibility varied depending on the system and clinical setting. Conclusion Current endometriosis classifications remain purpose-specific and clinically fragmented. Rather than replacing one imperfect system with another, future progress will likely depend on a modular framework combining a robust anatomical-descriptive backbone with validated domain-specific overlays. Among existing systems, the modular #Enzian classification appears to offer the most promising structural basis for such further development.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Published
2026-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-026-08563-4
Primary Topic
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Towards a uniform classification of endometriosis: a comparative review and evidence mapping of current classification systems

Simon‐Hermann Enzelsberger, Peter Oppelt
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
article

Towards a uniform classification of endometriosis: a comparative review and evidence mapping of current classification systems

Simon‐Hermann Enzelsberger, Peter Oppelt
article en

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To compare current endometriosis classification systems across clinically relevant domains and to identify which components may be used for a single internationally accepted classification. Methods A PubMed search was performed up to December 31, 2025, to identify publications on the revised American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification (rASRM) and endometriosis classifications introduced after 2000 (#Enzian, AAGL, EFI, UBESS, dPEI, Endo-Stage MRI, NMS-E, VNESS, FOATIaRVS, Chapron), excluding case reports. The full classification names as well as their abbreviations were used as search terms. The included systems were evaluated across pre-defined domains: descriptive anatomical mapping, pain, fertility, quality of life, surgical complexity, surgical duration, complication risk, non-invasive applicability, treatment guidance, disease progression, postoperative recurrence, and reproducibility. Results No currently available classification performed well across all domains. #Enzian provided the most comprehensive anatomical-descriptive framework. EFI remained the best-validated tool for predicting spontaneous conception after surgery. AAGL, UBESS, dPEI, and Endo-Stage MRI were most informative for operative complexity and surgical risk stratification. In contrast, correlations with pain, quality of life, disease progression, and treatment response were generally weak or inconsistent across systems. Evidence for recurrence prediction was limited, and reproducibility varied depending on the system and clinical setting. Conclusion Current endometriosis classifications remain purpose-specific and clinically fragmented. Rather than replacing one imperfect system with another, future progress will likely depend on a modular framework combining a robust anatomical-descriptive backbone with validated domain-specific overlays. Among existing systems, the modular #Enzian classification appears to offer the most promising structural basis for such further development.

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics
Johannes Kepler University of Linz (AT), Kepler Universitätsklinikum (AT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.