Early-life factors, in-utero exposures and endometriosis risk: a meta-analysis

Jessica Ottolina, Matteo Schimberni, Sofia Makieva, Ludovica Bartiromo, Teresa Fazia, Luisa Bernardinelli, Paola Viganò, Massimo Candiani, Davide Gentilini

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


This meta-analysis aimed to offer a general picture of the available data on the effects of early-life factors on the risk of developing endometriosis in adult life. An advanced, systematic search of the online medical databases PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL was limited to full-length manuscripts published in English in peer-reviewed journals up to February 2019. Log of relative risk (RR) was employed to calculate the pooled effect sizes using both fixed and random effects modelling and I-squared tests to assess heterogeneity. Funnel plots were used to investigation publication bias. The meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42019138668). Six studies that included a total of 2360 women affected by endometriosis were analysed. The pooled results showed that the risk of developing endometriosis in adult life was significantly increased by being born prematurely (logRR 0.21, 95% CI –0.03 to 0.40), having a low birthweight (logRR 0.35, 95% CI –0.15 to 0.54), being formula-fed (logRR 0.65, 95% CI –0.35 to 0.95) and having been exposed to diethylstilbestrol (DES) in utero (logRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.04. Among intrauterine and early neonatal exposures, prematurity, birthweight, formula feeding and DES were risk factors for the development of endometriosis in adult life.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)279-289
Number of pages11
JournalReproductive BioMedicine Online
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2020


  • Early life factors
  • Endometriosis
  • Epidemiology
  • In-utero exposures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology
  • Developmental Biology


Dive into the research topics of 'Early-life factors, in-utero exposures and endometriosis risk: a meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this