Abdominal and perineal scar endometriosis: Retrospective study on 40 cases

Surgical and Percutaneous Image-Guided Therapies of Abdominal Wall Endometriosis: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence

OBJECTIVE

Despite various surgical and nonsurgical strategies for abdominal wall endometriosis, the lack of definitive guidance on optimal treatment choice leads to clinical uncertainty. This review scrutinizes the safety and efficacy of abdominal wall endometriosis treatments to aid in decision-making.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a systematic literature review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from 1947 until December 2023.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

A comprehensive literature search identified studies that assessed both surgical and nonsurgical interventions, including high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryoablation, radiofrequency ablation, and microwave ablation. This review is registered in NIHR-PROSPERO (CRD 42023494969). Local tumor control (LTC), local pain relief (LPR), and adverse events (AE) were recorded.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

This review included 51 articles among 831 identified. All study designs were considered eligible for inclusion. A total of 2674 patients are included: 2219 patients (83%) undergoing surgery, and 455 (17%) undergoing percutaneous interventions (342 HIFU, 103 cryoablation, 1 radiofrequency ablation, 9 microwave ablation). Follow-up length was 18 months in median, ranging from 1 to 235 months. Overall LTC rates ranged from 86% to 100%. Surgical interventions consistently demonstrated the highest rate of LTC with a median rate of 100%, and LPR with a median rate of 98.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 93.9-97.7). HIFU showed median LTC and LPR rates, respectively of 95.65% (95% CI, 87.7-99.9) and 76.1% (95% CI, 61.8-90.4); and cryoablation of 85.7% (95% CI, 66.0-99.9) and 79.2% (95% CI, 67.4-91.03). Minor AE was reported after surgery in 17.5% of patients (225/1284) including 15.9% (199/1284) of mesh implantation; 76.4% (239/313) after HIFU; and 8.7% (9/103) after cryoablation. Severe AE was reported in 25 patients in the surgery group and 1 in the percutaneous group.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile and efficacy of nonsurgical interventions support their clinical utility for management of abdominal wall endometriosis.

Cumulative Recurrence Rate and Risk Factors for Recurrent Abdominal Wall Endometriosis after Surgical Treatment in a Single Institution

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the cumulative recurrence rate and risk factors for recurrent abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) after surgical treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single gynecological surgery center between January 2004 and December 2020. Patients who were surgically treated and followed up for at least 6 months after surgery were selected.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients with pathologically diagnosed AWE were included in this study. The median follow-up duration was 22.5 months (range, 6-106). The median age was 37 years (range, 22-48), and 33.3% of the patients were nulliparous. Among the patients included in our study, 55.6% complained of a mass with cyclic pain, and 27.8% had a palpable mass. In addition, 22.2% of patients experienced recurrence with 17.5±9.7 months of mean time to recurrence. The cumulative recurrence rates at 24 and 60 months after surgical treatment of AWE were 23.8% and 39.1%, respectively. There were no statistically significant risk factors for the recurrence of AWE, including postoperative medical treatment.

CONCLUSION

The recurrence rate of AWE appears to be correlated with the follow-up duration. There was no statistically significant risk factor for the recurrence of AWE. Unlike ovarian endometriosis, postoperative hormonal treatment does not seem to lower the recurrence of AWE. The findings of the current study may help healthcare providers in counselling and managing patients with AWE.

Exploring the Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Ultrasound-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation for Abdominal Wall Endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the clinical value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USg-HIFU) for the diagnosis and treatment of abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE).

METHODS

Magnetic resonance imaging was performed before and after USg-HIFU. Information on clinical characteristics of patients, MRI characteristics of lesions, and treatment outcomes were collected. Thirty AWE lesions in 29 patients were examined before HIFU treatment, while 27 patients were examined after treatment. The results of MRI and color doppler ultrasound before surgery, as well as the volume and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of the lesions before and after USg-HIFU treatment were compared. We also observed the clinical symptoms remission, recurrence, and ablation rates of the lesions in follow-up after HIFU treatment.

RESULTS

The locations of the 30 AWE lesions were identified by MRI before USg-HIFU treatment. Their sizes appeared larger on MRI than ultrasound (P < 0.05). A total of 27 lesions were evaluated by MRI after USg-HIFU treatment, of which 92.6% (25/27) lesions were of high or slightly high signal intensity on T1-weighted images, and 77.8% (21/27) lesions were of mixed signal intensity on T2-weighted images. The mean ADC values of AWE lesions were 1.47 (1.20-1.59) × 10-3mm2/s and 1.86 (1.61-2.12) × 10-3mm2/s for pre-and post-HIFU treatment (P < 0.05). Patients with higher ablation rates (>50%) had a higher complete/partial remission rate than those with lower ablation rates (<50%), and had a lower recurrence rate (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

MRI is a useful tool for identifying the location, size, and concurrent changes of AWE before and after USg-HIFU treatment, which is beneficial for follow-up monitoring and defining treatment efficacy.

Abdominal wall endometriosis: an update in diagnosis, perioperative considerations and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is rare with limited evidence guiding diagnosis and treatment. The purpose of this review is to provide an update of the diagnosis, perioperative considerations, and treatment of AWE.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies further characterize presenting symptoms and locations of AWE. Prior abdominal surgery remains the greatest risk factor for the development of AWE. Newer evidence suggests that increasing BMI may also be a risk factor. Ultrasound is first-line imaging for diagnosis. Magnetic resonance image is preferred for surgical planning for deep or extensive lesions. Laparotomy with wide local excision is considered standard treatment for AWE with great success. Novel techniques in minimally invasive surgery have been described as effective for the treatment of AWE. A multidisciplinary surgical approach is often warranted for successful excision and reapproximation of skin and/or fascial defects. Noninvasive therapies including ultrasonic ablation or cryotherapy are also emerging as promising treatment strategies in select patients.

SUMMARY

Recent studies provide further evidence to guide diagnosis through physical exam and imaging as well as pretreatment planning. Treatment options for AWE are rapidly expanding with novel approaches in minimally invasive and noninvasive therapies now available.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Vulvo-Perineal Endometriosis: A Systematic Review

Objective: To describe the available knowledge on vulvo-perineal endometriosis including its diagnosis, clinical management and recurrence rate.

Methods: We followed the PRISMA guidelines for Systematic Reviews and our study was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020202441). The terms “Endometriosis” and “Perineum” or “Vulva” were used as keywords. Cochrane Library, Medline/Pubmed, Embase and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. Papers in English, Spanish, Portuguese, French or Italian from inception to July 30, 2020 were considered. Reference lists of included articles and other literature source such as Google Scholar were also manually scrutinized in order to identify other relevant studies. Two independent reviewers screened potentially eligible studies according to inclusion criteria.

Results: Out of 539 reports, 90 studies were eligible including a total of 283 patients. Their mean age was 32.7 ± 7.6 years. Two hundred sixty-three (95.3%) presenting with vulvo-perineal endometriosis have undergone either episiotomy, perineal trauma or vaginal injury or surgery. Only 13 patients (4.7%) developed vulvo-vaginal endometriosis spontaneously i.e., without any apparent condition favoring it. The reasons that motivated the patients to take medical advice were vulvo-perineal cyclical pain increasing during menstruations (98.2% of the patients, n = 278). Out of the 281 patients for whom a clinical examination was described, 274 patients (97.5%) showed a vulvo-perineal nodule, mass or swelling while six presented with bluish cutaneous lesions (2.1%) and 1 with bilateral polyps of the labia minora (0.4%). All but one patients underwent surgical excision of their lesions but only 88 patients (28.1%) received additional hormonal therapy. The recurrence rate was 10.2% (29 patients) considering a median follow-up period of 10 months (based on 61 studies).

Conclusion: In conclusion, vulvo-perineal endometriosis is a rare entity with approximately 300 cases reported in the literature since 1923. With the available knowledge shown in this systematic review, we encourage all practitioners to think about perineal endometriosis in case of perineal cyclical pain with or without previous perineal damage. Diagnosis should be done with clinical exam, perineal ultrasound and pelvic MRI when available. In case of anal sphincter involvement, perianal ultrasound should be performed. Surgical excision of the lesion should be realized in order to remove the lesion and to confirm the diagnosis histologically. Hormonal treatment could be proposed to attempt to decrease the size of a large lesion before surgery or to avoid recurrence of the lesion. As evidence-based approach to the diagnosis, treatment and recurrence rate of affected patients remains a challenge given its low prevalence, the variations in management found in the articles included and the limited quality of available studies, we suggest that a prospective database on vulvo-perineal endometriosis should be generated to increase knowledge but also awareness among healthcare professionals and optimize patients' care.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020202441.

Perineal endometriosis: a rare case of a unique sizeable nodule

Endometriosis is the presence of endometrial tissue in abnormal locations outside the uterine cavity. These locations are usually the ovaries, the peritoneum, and the uterine ligaments. Less frequently, the endometrial tissue can affect the perineum especially after surgical procedures or obstetric lesions. In this case report, we describe the case of a patient suffering from pain and swelling, with a sizeable nodule in an old episiotomy scar. Clinical examination, ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) helped evoke the diagnosis of perineal endometriosis, and there were no signs of other endometriosis locations. Hormonal treatment was provided at first, but there was no clinical improvement after three months, so the treatment had to be surgical. Histopathological examination of the endometriotic mass confirmed the diagnosis. There were no immediate postoperative complications, and no clinical symptoms or recurrence signs six months and one year after.