Clinical characteristic analysis of 32 patients with abdominal incision endometriosis

Extra-pelvic endometriosis: A review

Background

Extra‐pelvic endometriosis is a rare type of endometriosis, which occurs in a distant site from gynecological organs. The diagnosis of extra‐pelvic endometriosis can be extremely challenging and may result in a delay in diagnosis. The main objective of this review was to characterize abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) and thoracic endometriosis (TE).

Methods

The authors performed a literature search to provide an overview of AWE and TE, which are the major types of extra‐pelvic endometriosis.

Main findings

Abdominal wall endometriosis includes scar endometriosis secondary to the surgical wound and spontaneous AWE, most of which occur in the umbilicus or groin. Surgical treatment appeared to be effective for AWE. Case reports indicated that the diagnosis and treatment of catamenial pneumothorax or endometriosis‐related pneumothorax (CP/ERP) are challenging, and a combination of surgery and postoperative hormonal therapy is essential. Further, catamenial hemoptysis (CH) can be adequately managed by hormonal treatment, unlike CP/ERP.

Conclusion

Evidence‐based approaches to diagnosis and treatment of extra‐pelvic endometriosis remain immature given the low prevalence and limited quality of research available in the literature. To gain a better understanding of extra‐pelvic endometriosis, it would be advisable to develop a registry involving a multidisciplinary collaboration with gynecologists, general surgeons, and thoracic surgeons.

Parietal Mass: Two Case Reports of Rare Cesarean Scar Endometriosis

Scar endometriosis is an uncommon type of extra-pelvic endometriosis. However, it should be suspected in any woman of childbearing age complaining of a cyclic, painful nodule in a scar from a previous obstetric or gynecologic procedure, after excluding other differential diagnoses. The treatment of choice is surgical resection. We report two cases of scar endometriosis that appeared in two young ladies after cesarean sections, discovered by a parietal mass near the cesarean scars.

Abdominal wall endometriosis: An 11-year retrospective observational cohort study

Objective

The objective of this study was to review the records of patients with excised abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) to determine patient characteristics, diagnostic methods, presence of concurrent pelvic endometriosis and type of surgery.

Study design

Medical records from an 11-year period were searched to identify histologically confirmed AWE cases. Descriptive data were collected and analyzed. Two subgroups were differentiated: isolated AWE and pelvic endometriosis-associated AWE.

Results

Thirty-five women with AWE were included. The most common symptom was cyclic abdominal or parietal pain (68.6%); 17.1% of the women had no symptoms. Twenty-nine women (82.8%) had a history of gynecological or obstetrical surgery, most commonly cesarean section (CS). The mean interval between prior surgery and appearance of symptoms was 5.3 years. Six women (17.1%) had no prior surgery; all six presented with umbilical nodules, nulliparity and confirmed mild to severe pelvic endometriosis. Among all patients, 34.3% had concurrent pelvic endometriosis, 40% presented with isolated AWE and 25.7% had no pelvic exploration. Women with concurrent pelvic endometriosis had significantly lower parity, smaller nodule size and a higher likelihood of umbilical location than those with isolated AWE (p < 0.05). A history of CS was more commonly found in women with isolated AWE. The overall recurrence rate over the study period was 11.4%, with a mean follow-up period of 5.2 years.

Conclusions

AWE is an uncommon condition associated with long diagnostic and therapeutic delays. In patients with umbilical AWE and no surgical history, pelvic endometriosis is commonly present and should be highly suspected.

Abdominal wall endometriosis: differentiation from other masses using CT features

PURPOSE

To assess the utility of morphologic and quantitative CT features in differentiating abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) from other masses of the abdominal wall.

METHODS

Retrospective IRB-approved study of 105 consecutive women from two institutions who underwent CT and biopsy/resection of abdominal wall masses. CTs were independently reviewed by two radiologists blinded to final histopathologic diagnoses. Associations between CT features and pathology were tested using Fisher's Exact Test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated. P values were adjusted for multiple variable testing.

RESULTS

24.8% (26/105) of patients had histologically proven abdominal wall endometriosis. The other most common diagnoses included adenocarcinoma NOS (21%; 22/105), desmoid (14.3%; 15/105), and leiomyosarcoma (8.6%; 9/105). CT features significantly associated with endometriosis for both readers were location below the umbilicus (P = 0.0188), homogeneous density (P = 0.0188), and presence of linear infiltration irradiating peripherally from a central soft tissue nodule (i.e., "gorgon" sign) (P < 0.0001). The highest combined sensitivity (0.69, 95% CI: 0.48-0.86) and specificity (0.97, 95% CI: 0.91-1.00) for both readers occurred for patients having all three of these features present. Border type (P = 0.0199) was only significant for R2, peritoneal extension (P = 0.0188) was only significantly for R1, and the remainder of features were insignificant (P = 0.06-60). There was overlap in Hounsfield units on non-contrast CT (N = 26) between AWE (median: 45HU, range: 39-54) and other abdominal wall masses (median: 38.5HU, range: 15-58).

CONCLUSION

CT features are helpful in differentiating AWE from other abdominal wall soft tissue masses. Such differentiation may assist decisions regarding possible biopsy and treatment planning.

Abdominal wall endometriosis: 12 years of experience at a large academic institution

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to review patient characteristics and intraoperative findings for excised cases of abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE).

STUDY DESIGN

A 12 year medical record search was performed for cases of excised AWE, and the diagnosis was confirmed on pathological specimen. Descriptive data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 65 patients included, the primary clinical presentation was abdominal pain and/or a mass/lump (73.8% and 63.1%, respectively). Most patients had a history of cesarean section (81.5%) but 6 patients (9.2%) had no prior surgery. Time from the initial surgery to presentation ranged from 1 to 32 years (median, 7.0 years), and time from the most recent relevant surgery ranged from 1 to 32 years (median, 4.0 years). Five patients (7.7%) required mesh for fascial closure following the resection of the AWE. We were unable to demonstrate a correlation between the increasing numbers of open abdominal surgeries and the time to presentation or depth of involvement. Age, body mass index, and parity also were not predictive of depth of involvement. There were increased rates of umbilical lesions (75% vs 5.6%, P < .001) in nulliparous compared with multiparous women as well as in women without a history of cesarean section (66.7% vs 1.9%, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In women with a mass or pain at a prior incision, the differential diagnosis should include AWE. Although we were unable to demonstrate specific characteristics predictive for AWE, a large portion of our population had a prior cesarean section, suggesting a correlation.

Endometriosis externa within the rectus abdominis muscle

The presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside the uterine cavity is called "endometriosis". Recklinghausen first defined this entity in 1896, and Sampson first named it in detail in 1921. Endometriosis is most often seen in the pelvis. Although extrapelvic endometriosis is rare, it can be seen in almost every organ. Endometriosis localized in the rectus abdominis muscle is very rare. A patient who had two previous cesarean sections presented with a 23 mm heterogeneous hypoechoic mass within the rectus abdominis muscle, approximately 1 cm superior to the Pfannenstiel incision that was diagnosed as endometriosis externa by fine-needle biopsy and excisional biopsy. Herein, we report this patient along with the literature.

Cesarean scar endometrioma: Case series

AIM: To evaluate endometrioma located at cesarean scatrix.

METHODS: Medical data of 6 patients who presented to our institution with abdominal wall endometrioma were evaluated retrospectively and reviewed literature in this case series. The diagnostic approaches and treatment is discussed.

RESULTS: All patients had a painful mass located at abdominal scars with history of cesarean section. The ages ranged from 31 to 34 and Doppler ultrasonography (US) detected hypoechoic mass with a mean diameter of 30 mm. Initial diagnosis was endometrioma in 4 and incisional hernia in 2 of 6 patients. Treatment was achieved with surgical excision in 5 patients, and one is followed by hormone suppression therapy with gonadotropin.

CONCLUSION: Malignant or benign tumors of abdominal wall and incisional hernias should be kept in mind for diagnosis of endometrioma. Imaging methods like doppler US, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging should be used for differential diagnosis. Definitive diagnosis can only be made histopathologically. The treatment should be complete surgical excision and take care against intraoperative auto-inoculation of endometrial tissue in order to prevent recurrences.

Subcutaneous abdominal wall masses: radiological reasoning

OBJECTIVE

A 36-year-old woman presented to her primary care physician with right lower abdominal pain. Her physician subsequently requested a CT to rule out appendicitis. Contrast-enhanced CT was performed and revealed no evidence of appendicitis but showed two subcutaneous ovoid soft-tissue masses anterior to the rectus sheath in the upper pelvis. Pelvic MRI confirmed the two masses, which showed mild enhancement. The objective of this article is to discuss a diagnostic approach to subcutaneous soft-tissue masses in the abdominal wall. Diagnosis was endometriosis of the abdominal wall.

CONCLUSION

Integrating salient imaging findings with clinical history is crucial when approaching the diagnosis of subcutaneous soft-tissue masses. The diagnosis of endometriosis should be entertained when soft-tissue masses are seen in the distribution of a cesarean section scar in a woman of reproductive age. Pain, particularly with a cyclic pattern, is highly suggestive of endometriosis. If endometriosis is suspected on CT or ultrasound, MRI can be performed for further evaluation. Definitive diagnosis is made with biopsy. Because subcutaneous nodules are so amenable percutaneous biopsy, imaging features, although of interest, are somewhat ancillary to the diagnostic workup.

Large abdominal wall endometrioma following laparoscopic hysterectomy

Although extrapelvic endometriosis is rare, it should be considered in the diagnosis of the female patient with an abdominal mass and pain who has had a previous surgical procedure.

Background:

Endometriosis is a common condition in women that affects up to 45% of patients in the reproductive age group by causing pelvic pain. It is characterized by the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterine cavity and is rarely found subcutaneously or in abdominal incisions, causing it to be overlooked in patients with abdominal pain.

Methods:

A 45-year-old woman presented with lower abdominal pain 2 years following a laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy. She was found to have incidental cholelithiasis and a large abdominal mass suggestive of a significant ventral hernia on CT scan.

Results:

Due to the peculiar presentation, surgical intervention took place that revealed a large 9cm×7.6cm×6.2cm abdominal wall endometrioma.

Conclusion:

Although extrapelvic endometriosis is rare, it should be entertained in the differential diagnosis for the female patient who presents with an abdominal mass and pain and has a previous surgical history.

Caesarean section greatly increases risk of scar endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incidence of scar endometriosis after different surgical procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study of 72 patients diagnosed with scar endometriosis between 1978 and 2003 was performed. Patient age, site of endometriosis, previous operations, time-gap between last surgery and onset of symptoms, nodule characteristics, and recurrence were evaluated.

RESULTS

Age ranged from 16 to 48 years. Location varied according to the previous surgery: 46 caesarean section, one hysterectomy, one in abdominal surgery, 19 episiotomy, one was a relapse and two pelvic floor procedures, two women with no previous surgery. The incidence of scar endometriosis after caesarean section was significantly higher than after episiotomy (0.2 and 0.06%, respectively: p<0.00001) with a relative risk of 3.3. Pain was the most frequent symptom. The mean time between surgery and onset of symptoms was 3.7 years.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm that scar endometriosis is a rare condition and indicate, probably for the first time, that caesarean section greatly increases the risk of developing scar endometriosis.