Gallbladder and muscular endometriosis: a case report

Digestive system deep infiltrating endometriosis: What do we know

Digestive system infiltrating endometriosis (DSIE) is an uncommon form of endometriosis in the digestive system. DSIE often occurs in the intestines (especially the sigmoid rectum), liver, gallbladder and pancreas. Clinically, DSIE presents with the same symptoms as endometriosis, including cyclic pain, bleeding and infertility, in addition to specific biliary/intestinal obstruction and gastrointestinal bleeding. Compared to general endometriosis, DSIE has unique biological behaviour and pathophysiological mechanisms. Most DSIEs are deep invasive endometrioses, characterized by metastasis to the lymph nodes and lymphatic vessels, angiogenesis, peripheral nerve recruitment, fibrosis and invasion of surrounding tissues. DSIE-related peripheral angiogenesis is divided into three patterns: angiogenesis, vasculogenesis and inosculation. These patterns are regulated by interactions between multiple hypoxia-hormone cytokines. The nerve growth factors regulate the extensive neurofibril recruitment in DSIE lesions, which accounts for severe symptoms of deep pain. They are also associated with fibrosis and the aggressiveness of DSIE. Cyclic changes in DSIE lesions, recurrent inflammation and oxidative stress promote repeated tissue injury and repair (ReTIAR) mechanisms in the lesions, accelerating fibril formation and cancer-related mutations. Similar to malignant tumours, DSIE can also exhibit aggressiveness derived from collective cell migration mediated by E-cadherin and N-cadherin. This often makes DSIE misdiagnosed as a malignant tumour of the digestive system in clinical practice. In addition to surgery, novel treatments are urgently required to effectively eradicate this lesion.

Urological knowledge and tools applied to diagnosis and surgery in deep infiltrating endometriosis - a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

This review discusses deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) diagnosis and surgery using current urological knowledge and technologies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Narrative review of deep infiltrating endometriosis that result in urological issues. We examined manuscripts from Pubmed, Embase, and Scielo's database using the following MeSH terms: ('endometriosis') AND ('urology' OR 'urological' OR 'urologist') AND ('bladder' OR'vesical') AND ('ureteral' OR 'ureter').Selection followed PRISMA guidelines. Sample images from our records were brought to endorse the findings.

RESULTS

Thirty four related articles were chosen from 105. DIE may affect the urinary system in 52.6% of patients. Lower urinary tract symptoms may require urodynamic examination. Ultrasonography offers strong statistical yields for detecting urinary tract lesions or distortions, but magnetic resonance will confirm the diagnosis. Cystoscopy can detect active lesions, although any macroscopic visual appeal is pathognomonic. Endourology is utilized intraoperatively for bladder and ureteral assessment, however transurethral endoscopic excision of bladder lesions had higher recurrence rates. Laparoscopy is the route of choice for treatment; partial cystectomy, and bladder shaving were the most prevalent surgical treatments for bladder endometriosis. Regarding the ureteral treatment, the simple ureterolysis and complex reconstructive techniques were described in most papers. Using anatomical landmarks or neuronavigation, pelvic surgical systematization allows intraoperative neural structure identification.

CONCLUSIONS

DIE in the urinary system is common, however the number of publications with high level of evidence is limited. The initial tools for diagnosis are ultrasonography and cystoscopy, but magnetic resonance is the most reliable tool. When the patient has voiding symptoms, the urodynamic examination is crucial. Laparoscopy improves lesion detection and anatomical understanding. This approach must be carried out by professionals with high expertise, since the surgery goes beyond the resection of lesions and includes the preservation of nerve structures and urinary tract reconstruction techniques.

Endometriosis: A Comprehensive Review

Endometriosis is a relatively common condition in which endometrial tissue is established in locations outside the uterus where, like the eutopic endometrium, it responds to hormonal stimuli and develops internal bleeding, inflammation, and fibrosis. These changes are associated with chronic and often debilitating cyclic pain and infertility. The pathogenesis of endometriosis is multifactorial, and several theories have been proposed to explain it. These include retrograde menstruation, celomic metaplasia, embryologic rests, and lymphovascular spread. Hormones, immunologic status, and genetic factors may also play a role. In most patients, the disease involves pelvic organs, but rarely it may also extend to a large variety of distant locations in the body. Patients with ovarian endometriosis are at higher risk for developing ovarian carcinomas including endometrioid and clear cell carcinomas. Some of these carcinomas may arise in a background of structural and/or nuclear atypia within the endometriotic foci. There is no known cure for endometriosis and treatment mostly consists of managing chronic pain or infertility.

Multimodality imaging and clinicopathologic assessment of abdominal wall endometriosis: knocking down the enigma

PURPOSE

To review the clinical, multimodality imaging, and pathologic characteristics of abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE), the most common type of extra-pelvic endometriosis.

METHODS

116 women with histopathologically confirmed extragenital endometriosis diagnosed between 2/2014 and 6/2017 were evaluated retrospectively. Of these, 26 (22.4%) were found to have AWE and 18/26 met inclusion criteria for imaging. Available imaging studies were re-reviewed by two expert radiologists. Data regarding clinical features, histopathologic findings, and management were collected through medical record review.

RESULTS

21 pathology-proven AWE deposits were identified by imaging in 18 women [mean age at diagnosis of 38.5 years (range 31-48)]. Prior C-section was present in 15/18 (83.3%) and pelvic endometriosis in 3/18 (16.7%) patients. Patients presented with abdominal pain in 14/18 (77.8%) cases, which was cyclical in 8/14; palpable mass in 12/18 (66.7%); fluid discharge in 2/18 (11.1%); and local skin discoloration in 2/18 (11.1%). Of the 21 lesions, 15 were evaluated with US, 10 with CT, and 5 with MRI. Mean lesion dimensions were 2.5 × 2.2 × 2.6 cm, and deposits were predominantly located at midline or left hemiabdomen [22/30 (73.3%)], were either stellate [15/30 (50%)] or round [15/30 (50%)] in shape, had ill-defined margins [21/30 (70%)], were heterogenous in appearance [27/30 (90%)], and involved both deep and superficial abdominal wall layers [17/30 (56.7%)]. On US, lesions were mainly isoechoic/hyperechoic [7/15 (46.7%)], and scarcely vascular [8/15 (53.3%)] with a peripheral vascular pattern [8/13 (61.5%)]. On CT, AWEs were hypervascular and homogeneous [8/10 (80%)], superiorly located to scar tissue, and on MRI lesions appeared hyperintense [4/5 (80%)] to muscle with T2 cystic and T1 hemorrhagic foci [4/5 (80%)]. In 23/27 (85.1%) original reports, there was at least one known mass prior to imaging; AWE was correctly diagnosed in only 7/23 (30.4%) cases. In those with no prior knowledge of a mass, the lesion was detected in 3/4 (75%), but AWE was only diagnosed in a single case. Median time between onset of symptoms and histopathology was 24.41 moths (IQR 15.18-47.33).

CONCLUSIONS

AWE is a challenging clinical entity frequently diagnosed with a significant delay and easily misinterpreted despite multimodality imaging. Familiarity with its radiologic features holds the potential for positively impacting diagnosis.

Abdominal wall endometrioma: ultrasonographic features and correlation with clinical findings

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of abdominal wall endometrioma (AWE) is often confused with other surgical conditions. Certain factors relating to knowledge of the clinical history of the disease make correct diagnosis and treatment difficult.

AIMS

To present the clinical findings and ultrasonographic (US) features of AWE with special emphasis on size-related features.

STUDY DESIGN

This study reviewed abdominal wall endometriomas during a 2-year period in the Radiology Department of Sifa University Hospital, Izmir.

METHODS

Eleven women (mean age 32.6 years) with 12 scar endometriomas (mean diameter 29.2 mm) were consecutively evaluated by US and Colour Doppler examination (CDUS) prior to surgery. Lesions were grouped into large (≥3 cm) and small nodules. Vascularisation was classified as location (central, peripheral and mixed) and severity (absent, moderately vascular and hypervascular). In each patient, the nature of pain (absent, cyclic: associated with menstruation and continuous), historical and clinical data were documented. Four patients underwent Magnetic Resonance Imaging and their findings were presented. Fisher's exact test, χ(2) test for categorical data and the unpaired T-test for continuous variables were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In all the women, US of the AWE showed the presence of a solid hypoechoic mass (less echogenic than the surrounding hyperechoic fat) within the abdominal wall. There was a significant correlation between AWE sizes with repeated caesareans and the mean time between the last operation and admission to hospital (p<0.05). Large endometriomas showed increased central vascularity (p<0.05). Cyclic pain was more frequent in small lesions, whereas continuous pain was more commonly found in patients with larger lesions (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

AWE is often misdiagnosed clinically because endometriosis may occur years after the caesarean section, the pain is often non-cyclic in nature, and there is not always a palpable tender mass. The sonographic and Doppler findings, along with proper correlation with clinical data, may substantially contribute to the correct diagnosis of endometrioma.