A retrospective review of abdominal wall endometriosis in Shanghai, China

Caesarean scar endometriosis: how to make an accurate diagnosis

Caesarean scar endometriosis is a rare condition characterised by the presence of endometrial tissue within a surgical scar following a caesarean section. A woman in her late 30s presented with a painful lump beneath her caesarean section skin scar, worsening during menstruation. Despite a previous incision and drainage procedure for a 'scar abscess', the symptoms persisted. Ultrasound imaging revealed a cystic lesion beneath the scar. A diagnosis of scar endometriosis was made, and surgical excision was performed. The patient remained symptom-free at 2-year follow-up postsurgery. Histopathology confirmed the presence of endometrial glands and stroma within the scar tissue. This case demonstrates that a reliable diagnosis of caesarean section endometriosis could be made with a triad of symptoms of a cyclic painful mass at the site of a caesarean section scar. Imaging is helpful in excluding other differential diagnoses. Diagnosis can be confirmed with histopathology and treated with complete surgical excision.

Postcesarean section abdominal wall endometriosis: a rare case report

Introduction and importance

Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is a rare but significant complication following cesarean sections. It manifests with recurring right lower quadrant pain, particularly during menstruation, and palpable masses at the cesarean scar site. Recognizing these symptoms is critical for timely diagnosis and effective management. This report discusses the clinical manifestations, diagnostic approach, surgical intervention, and postoperative outcomes of AWE in a specific patient.

Case presentation

A 28-year-old female presented with recurrent right lower quadrant pain, exacerbated during menstruation, and a palpable mass at her previous cesarean scar. Imaging revealed a well-defined 3.6 ×3 cm mass infiltrating through all layers of the abdominal wall.

Clinical discussion

This case highlights the challenges of diagnosing AWE, often presenting with vague symptoms like cyclic pain and palpable masses. The primary diagnostic tool was a CT scan, with histopathological examination confirming the diagnosis. Surgical excision was performed, resulting in significant symptom relief and a low recurrence rate.

Conclusion

This case underscores the importance of vigilance for AWE symptoms in patients with prior cesarean sections. Early recognition and surgical intervention are paramount for effective management and symptom alleviation.

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.

Incidental Abdominal Wall Endometriosis in Plastic Surgery: Two Cases and Review of the Literature

Endometriosis is a common cause of pain and infertility. Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is a form of extrapelvic endometriosis that can be encountered during abdominal surgery such as abdominoplasty or free flap harvest. We report two cases of AWE; one found intraoperatively in a 32-year-old woman desiring body contouring after undergoing cesarean section, and a second in a 36-year-old woman requiring resection and reconstruction of a left chondroid tenosynovial giant cell tumor of her temporomandibular joint. During free flap planning, she was found to have endometriosis of her right hemi-abdomen. Both patients underwent resection of their AWE and were referred to their obstetrics and gynecology physicians for consideration of menstrual suppression to decrease their risk of recurrence.

Malignancy in Abdominal Wall Endometriosis: Is There a Way to Avoid It? A Systematic Review

Background: Malignant-associated abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is a rare pathology, likely to occur in 1% of scar endometriosis. The objectives of this study were to update the evidence on tumor degeneration arising from AWE to notify about the clinical characteristics, the different treatments offered to patients and their outcomes. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review of the literature was conducted. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were used. Prospero (ID number: CRD42024505274). Results: Out of the 152 studies identified, 63 were included, which involved 73 patients. The main signs and symptoms were a palpable abdominal mass (85.2%) and cyclic pelvic pain (60.6%). The size of the mass varied between 3 and 25 cm. Mean time interval from the first operation to onset of malignant transformation was 20 years. Most common cancerous histological types were clear cell and endometrioid subtypes. Most widely accepted treatment is the surgical resection of local lesions with wide margins combined with adjuvant chemotherapy. The prognosis for endometriosis-associated malignancy in abdominal wall scars is poor, with a five-year survival rate of around 40%. High rates of relapse have been reported. Conclusions: Endometrial implants in the abdominal wall should be considered as preventable complications of gynecological surgeries. Special attention should be paid to women with a history of cesarean section or uterine surgery.

Parietal endometriosis: An uncommon cause of c-section scar pain - A case report

INTRODUCTION

Parietal endometriosis is the most common form of extra-pelvic endometriosis. It develops on the surgical scar of c-section or hysterectomy. It is one of the causes of scar pain.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 26 years old patient presents with recurring pain and swelling of a Pfannenstiel scar 6 years after a caesarean section. Physical examination revealed a firm tender subcutaneous nodule that appeared at MRI as a heterogenous parietal mass infiltrating the rectus abdominis muscles. The patient underwent a wide excision of the nodule.

DISCUSSION

Parietal endometriosis can be the cause of debilitating scar pain even in patients with no history of deep endometriosis. It presents as firm parietal nodule that can become large and infiltrative if left untreated. Diagnosis is purely histological. Surgery remains the treatment of choice and requires a wide excision.

CONCLUSION

Parietal endometriosis, potentially more common due to rising number of caesarean sections, should be considered with persistent scar pain. Surgery is the preferred treatment, offering a conclusive diagnosis.

Women with Endometriosis-Who Is at Risk for Complications Associated with Pregnancy and Childbirth? A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Women with endometriosis (EM), particularly the manifestations of adenomyosis (AM) and deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE), suffer from pain and sterility. DIE also appears with several specific obstetric complications. To determine the risk profile, we designed a retrospective case-control study. Primary outcomes were defined as the risk of preterm birth and caesarean delivery (CD). Primiparous singleton pregnancies in women with DIE were compared with controls without EM. We matched for mode of conception and maternal age. A total of 41 women diagnosed with DIE and 164 controls were recruited. A total of 92.7% of the cases were also diagnosed with AM. Preterm birth occurred in 12.2% of cases and in 6.7% of controls. The difference was not statistically significant (OR: 1.932; 95% CI: 0.632-5.907). The rate of CD was similar in both groups. Remarkably, placental implantation disorders in the form of placenta praevia were eight times more frequent in women with DIE (9.8%) than in controls (1.2%, OR: 8.757; 95% CI: 1.545-49.614). Neonatal outcome was similar in both groups. Four out of fourteen cases reported abdominal wall endometriosis after CD. Women with DIE/AM and with placenta praevia are at risk of bleeding complications. After CD, they can develop abdominal wall EM. We therefore suggest evaluating the birth mode in each woman with DIE/AM.

Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE): Two case reports and literature review

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Endometriosis is one of the most frequent gynecologic disorders, clinically confirmed or suspected in one of nine women by the age of 44 years. Its location of occurrence can be classified into intra and extra pelvic. Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is one of its rare location, with frequency of 0.04 to 5.5 %. Furthermore there are only a few cases of AWE in Indonesia that have been reported.

CASE PRESENTATION

Here we present two Indonesian patients at a General Hospital in Tangerang, Indonesia. The first patient, 26 years old, complained of an umbilical mass 2 years after caesarean section. The second patient, 36 years old, complained of an umbilical mass since 8 months, with no history of prior surgery. Both patients had pre-operative ultrasonography (US) and underwent wide local excision. Histopathology examination with presence of endometrial glandular components and endometrial-like stroma confirmed the diagnosis of AWE.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

AWE is defined as any endometrial tissue found superficial to the peritoneum, locating most commonly at umbilical, inguinal area, and anterior abdominal wall. Pre-operative diagnostic tools include abdominal ultrasonography (US) or abdominopelvic computed tomography (CT) scan. Since treatment with medications is usually not effective, surgical treatment is recommended, along with confirmation by histopathological examination.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis of AWE should be suspected in all women with symptoms of an abdominal mass and cyclic pain, especially if the patient had history of surgery at the abdominal region. AWE is quite rare, but its symptoms can affect quality of life. Hence, a multi-disciplinary approach is necessary, with the strongly recommended treatment of wide local excision to prevent recurrence and malignant transformation.

Is dienogest a convenient treatment option for cesarean scar endometriosis or should it be treated surgically?

OBJECTIVES

Endometriosis-related conditions such as subcutaneous endometriosis have been frequently seen in recent years, and dienogest or surgical excision is generally preferred as a treatment option. Our aim in this study is to determine which treatment option will be more effective in reducing the symptoms of patients with cesarean scar endometriosis. Study design This prospective study was performed with 21 patients diagnosed with cesarean scar endometriosis. The demographic features of the patients, lesion sizes before and after medical and surgical treatment, VAS scores and Ca-125 levels were recorded. VAS scores and lesion sizes were compared before-after medical treatment and before-after surgery in same group.

RESULTS

A total of 18 women were identified, with a mean age of 32.3 ± 5.7 years. No significant decrease in lesion size was observed in the 1st and 6th-month controls after the use of dienogest (p > 0,05), while a significant decrease in VAS scores was detected (p < 0,05). After surgery, the decrease in both lesion size and VAS scores was found statistically significant (p < 0,05).

CONCLUSION

Dienogest, which is frequently used in the medical treatment of pelvic and ovarian endometriosis, reduces pain minimally in cesarean scar endometriosis but does not provide a change in lesion size. Therefore, surgical treatment of cesarean scar endometriosis seems to be more effective in reducing pain and decreasing the size of the lesions.

Surgical Scar Endometriosis: An Emerging Enigma

Introduction Surgical scar endometriosis is a subtype of extra-pelvic endometriosis that is characterized by the formation of endometrial tissue near the incision site in patients who have previously undergone surgery. In recent times, with the increasing trend in Caesarean sections, the incidence of surgical scar endometriosis has also emerged. This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and management of surgical scar endometriosis. Methodology We conducted this cross-sectional, observational study over eight years (2015-2022) in a tertiary care centre in Madurai district, Tamil Nadu, India. We conducted this study after acquiring an ethical certificate from the institutional ethics committee (IEC No. VMCIEC/22/2018). In this study, we sampled all women (n = 32) with a pathological diagnosis of scar endometriosis during the study period from hospital records (universal sampling). We searched the data for both general characteristics and lesion characteristics of the patients. The general characteristics include age, body mass index (BMI), parity, mode of delivery, symptoms, and imaging by ultrasound. We have recorded the lesion characteristics of the patient, including location and size of scar endometriosis, layers involved in scar endometriosis, and surgical technique from surgical notes written in the case sheet. The minimum sample size required for this study was 31 study subjects. We entered the data into Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) and analyzed it in SPSS version 21 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). We expressed the quantitative variables in terms of mean and standard deviation and the qualitative variables in terms of frequency and percentage. Results The mean age of the study participants was 34 years (range 23-55 years). In our study, 29 patients (90.6%) were multi-para, and only three (9.4%) were nullipara. Among 29 parous women, the majority (25, or 77.7%) had delivered by Caesarean section, while only four (12.5%) delivered by normal vaginal delivery. The surgical procedures preceding the scar endometriosis were predominantly obstetric procedures (87.4%), out of which 25 patients underwent a Caesarean section and only three underwent an episiotomy. The most common presenting symptom of scar endometriosis in our study was cyclical pain in the scar site (90.4%), followed by swelling (81.25%). In 62.5% of patients, the duration between the presentation of surgical scar endometriosis and surgical intervention was greater than one year. Subcutaneous tissue (90.6%) was the most commonly involved layer in surgical scar endometriosis, followed by the rectus sheath (86.2%). The surgical procedure done for scar endometriosis was wide local excision in 78% of patients, and the remaining 22% of patients had wide local excision with mesh repair. Conclusion Cesarean section is an obvious risk factor for surgical scar endometriosis. Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for surgical scar endometriosis in women presenting with cyclic pain at the scar site. Ultrasound is accurate in diagnosing scar endometriosis. Surgical management by wide local excision with a clear margin with or without mesh repair is the treatment of choice.

Spontaneous abdominal wall endometriosis: A Case Report and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

We present a case of spontaneous abdominal wall endometriosis presenting as a painless nodular mass in a woman with no prior history of abdominal surgery.

CASE REPORT

Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is an uncommon form of endometriosis, usually arising due to a past history of cesarean section or abdominal hysterectomy. However, in rare cases, abdominal wall endometriosis can arise in women with no prior history of abdominal surgery. A 48-year-old woman presented to our obstetrics and gynecology clinic with a painless nodular mass in the right lower quadrant of the abdomen. Abdominal wall ultrasound showed a hypoechoic heterogenous mass under the skin. Wide surgical resection of the mass was conducted and post-operative histopathological report revealed abdominal wall endometriosis.

CONCLUSION

Spontaneous abdominal wall endometriosis is an uncommon pathologic condition in which accurate diagnosis is difficult. As an increasing number of obstetrical and gynecological procedures are conducted worldwide, surgeons should keep this clinical entity in the differential diagnosis of any abdominal mass in reproductive-aged females regardless of their past surgical history.

The clinical features and long-term surgical outcomes of different types of abdominal wall endometriosis

PURPOSE

To classify abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) according to the invasive levels of tissue mass, and to compare the differences in clinical characteristics between different types of AWE.

METHODS

In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 367 patients who had undergone resection of abdominal-wall endometriotic lesions at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2008 to December 2018, and we divided the patients into three types according to their deepest level of lesion invasion. Type I designated invasion of skin and subcutaneous tissue; type II, of fascia and rectus abdominis; and type III, of peritoneum. We classified, compared, and analyzed the general conditions, clinical manifestations, auxiliary examinations, surgical conditions, postoperative conditions, and recurrence status of patients.

RESULTS

Of the 367 patients, type I patients accounted for 13.62%, type II patients for 56.68%, and type III for 29.7%. With respect to group comparisons, we observed that as the location of the mass deepened, the rate of concurrent pelvic endometriosis increased (P = 0.007), recurrent AWE was augmented (P = 0.02), the size of the mass increased (P < 0.001), the rate of multiple lesions became elevated (P < 0.001), the rate of mesh implantation increased (P < 0.001), the length of postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001) was lengthened, the number of postoperative fever cases (P = 0.006) increased, and the risk of drainage placement (P < 0.001) was enhanced. The 5-year cumulative recurrence rate was 3.3%, and there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate among various types of AWE.

CONCLUSION

Type III AWE carries more severe clinical manifestations, larger lesion size, longer operative time, greater intraoperative surgical difficulty, higher necessity of mesh implantation, and longer postoperative recovery process. Complete resection of AWE lesion is the main therapeutically approach and shows relatively low long-term recurrency rate.

Resection and Abdominal Wall Reconstruction for Cesarean Scar Endometriosis

Introduction

Currently, there are few reports describing the use of reconstructive techniques in the treatment of cesarean scar endometriosis (CSE). Here, we report a case of CSE, a rare form of endometriosis caused by scars from obstetric and gynecological surgeries. Case Report. A 50-year-old woman became aware of a painful, deep scar mass in her lower abdomen during her menstrual period 10 years after her second cesarean section. This was diagnosed as CSE after the biopsy. Under general anesthesia, the mass, a portion of the rectus abdominis, and a 1 cm tumor-free margin were resected as a whole, and the abdominal wall was reconstructed with a soft artificial mesh.

Results

No obvious recurrence or subjective symptoms were observed postoperatively or reported in the 1-year follow-up period. Discussion. Endometriosis appearing in a cesarean scar is rare; it is chiefly triggered by intraoperative mechanical implantation. In cases of surgical scar masses with a history of gynecological surgery and associated menstrual symptoms, this syndrome should be considered during diagnosis and treatment.

One of the rare reason of abdominal pain: abdominal wall endometriosis

Objectives

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of normal endometrial mucosa abnormally implanted in locations other than the uterine cavity. It is most commonly located in the pelvis but it is also rarely observed in the gastrointestinal tract, lung, liver, kidneys, central nervous system and abdominal wall. Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) commonly occurs following a caesarean section or pelvic surgery. The patients consult the physician mostly with complaints of cyclic abdominal pain and a palpable mass in the abdomen. The basic methods in diagnosing AWE are anamnesis and physical examination but ultrasound, computerized tomography, and sometimes magnetic resonance imaging of the abdomen are also used.

Material and Methods

In our study, we retrospectively analyzed 9 patients who underwent surgery at Avcılar State Hospital General Surgery Service between January 2015 and December 2018 with a preliminary diagnosis of AWE and confirmation through pathology results.

Results

Median age of the patients was 32 ± 4.66 and median body mass index (BMI) was 24.6 ± 1.15. Every patient except 1 had a history of cesarean section history. One patient was operated because of recurrence. Patients consulted the hospital with complaints of pain during menstruation and abdominal swelling. The start of the complaints was 4.1 years following C-section. Mostly ultrasound was used for imaging. For treatment, they all received en-bloc mass excision and their pathological diagnosis were compliant with endometriosis. Average surgery time was 40 minutes and average endometriosis lesion dimension was 3.4 cm. It was observed that the lesion extended to the anterior abdominal fascia in 6 of the patients, and 2 patients underwent fascia repair with propylene mesh because of the excessive defect size. No postoperative complication occured in any patient and no recurrence is observed.

Conclusion

In patients with periodic abdominal pain and swelling on the abdominal wall, AWE could be suspected and early diagnosis can be realized by carefully taking medical history and following physical examination, and appropriate radiological examinations and necessary surgical intervention can be performed. The method of diagnosis and treatment is to remove the lesion through wide excision.

Localized endometrioid cancer in the abdominal wall with synchronous early-stage endometrial cancer

Presented herein is the only case in literature with the synchronous development of endometrioid-type endometrium cancer and endometrioid carcinoma originating from the endometriosis foci in a scar tissue. A 44-year-old female patient presented with complaints of abnormal uterine bleeding, swelling at the rectus muscle level in the abdominal wall, and cyclic pain close to the old cesarean section incision scar. Pathological findings of the rectus muscle and endometrial biopsies revealed endometrioid adenocarcinoma (grades 2 and 1, respectively). Positron emission tomography, performed for primary focus investigation, revealed pathologic fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the uterine cavity and biopsy site, consistent with residual tumor without any pathologic uptake elsewhere. The patient underwent total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and systematic pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy, and the residual tumor in the left rectus muscle was excised. The patient was followed up for 3 years. At a postoperative follow-up in the 4^th year, no relapsed tumor or metastasis was seen on imaging.

Abdominal wall endometriosis: a case report

Abdominal wall endometriosis has an incidence of 0.3–1% of extrapelvic disease. Α 48-year-old female appeared in the emergency department with cellulitis in a lower midline incision. She had an endometrioma of the anterior abdominal wall removed 2 years ago. After 5 months, she underwent an open repair of an incisional hernia with a propylene mesh, which was unfortunately infected and removed 1 month later. Finally, in July 2019, she had her incisional hernia repaired with a biological mesh. Imaging modalities revealed a large mass below the umbilicus. Mass was punctured under ultrasound guidance. Cytology reported the recurrence of endometriosis. Pain and abdominal mass associating with menses were the two most typical symptoms. Wide local excision of the mass with at least 1 cm negative margins is the preferred treatment. Surgeons should maintain a high suspicion of the disease in reproductive women with circular pain, palpable abdominal mass and history of uterine-relating surgery.

Skin endometriosis: A case report and review of the literature

Skin endometriosis is a rare disease with variable clinical and histopathological characteristics that depend on hormonal stimuli. The skin is not a common location, as most cases of endometriosis involve pelvic sites, such as the ovaries, peritoneum and bowel. However, the most common extrapelvic site affected is the abdominal wall and this location of the disease is frequently associated with obstetric and gynecologic surgery. Here we report a case of skin endometriosis emerged as a painful subcutaneous nodule located near to the left side of an obstetrical surgery procedure scar. The patient affected was a woman in her reproductive age, with a history of right ovary endometriotic cyst laparoscopically removed and histologically confirmed as a primary endometriosis. Dermatologists should be aware of this condition in any woman with a painful lump located in the proximity of a pelvic surgery-induced scar. Its non-specific clinical appearance may confuse the clinician and may delay the diagnosis and management.

Clinico-pathological assessment of surgically removed abdominal wall endometriomas following cesarean section

BACKGROUND

Over the past few decades, the rate of Cesarean Section (CS) delivery has been rising rapidly and the prevalence of CS-associated complications including Abdominal Wall Endometriomas (AWE) increases with each additional operation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics, histopathological diagnostic role and surgical management of post-CS AWE through a retrospective case review.

METHODS

We calculated the incidence of AWE and reviewed all the patients underwent surgical removal of Post-CS AWE during the period of 2012-2018 who were diagnosed, treated and followed up for 2-8 years at our tertiary hospital.

RESULTS

Thirty women with AWE were included. The main symptom in 2/3 of cases was cyclic pain and 4 cases (13.3%) had no symptoms. The mean interval between prior CS and appearance of symptoms was 55.2 months and the mean size of the excised mass was 42 mm. Free surgical margin was less than 9 mm in 9 patients (30%) but no recurrence was recorded among all the studied patients. Pre-operative FNAC diagnosis was performed for only 3 patients (10%) which helped in excluding other potential pathologies. The clinical-pathological agreement value for detection of the nature of the abdominal wall mass was 93.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with suspected AWE should undergo preoperative cytological biopsy to exclude alternative diagnosis. Wide surgical excision with margin of less than 1 cm could be accepted especially in case of weak abdominal wall. More studies on the post-CS complications; risks, prevention, early detection and proper management should be encouraged.

Giant Abdominal Wall Endometrioma: A Case Report

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside the uterine cavity. Endometriosis may involve a wide spectrum of anatomic locations, but it typically involves pelvic locations. We report the case of a 45-year-old woman who presented with a history of abdominal pain and swelling. She first noticed the swelling eight months prior to presentation, and it had gradually progressed in size. The patient reported that the swelling increased in size during menses. Physical examination revealed a well-defined firm mass to the right of the midline. The mass had a smooth surface but limited mobility after abdominal wall muscle contraction, suggesting an infiltration of the underlying muscular structures. The findings demonstrated by computed tomography of the abdomen confirmed the diagnosis of abdominal wall endometrioma. The patient underwent successful resection of the lesion with complete resolution of her symptoms.

Oestrogen receptors and hypoxia inducible factor 1 alpha expression in abdominal wall endometriosis

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the protein levels and localization of oestrogen receptors (including ERa, ERb and G protein-coupled oestrogen receptor [GPER]) and hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha (HIF-1a) in normal control endometrium (COEM) and ectopic endometrium from abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE).

DESIGN

AWE (n = 20) were obtained during surgery; COEM (n = 40) were collected by curettage. All tissues were obtained during the proliferative or secretory phase. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues were used for immunohistochemical study for oestrogen receptors and HIF-1a proteins.

RESULT(S)

The expression of oestrogen receptors and HIF-1a in AWE differed from that in the corresponding menstrual cycle phase of COEM. Compared with COEM, ERa and HIF-1a were decreased whereas ERb and GPER were increased in AWE. The greatest difference was in GPER, with increased protein expression in both the cytoplasm and nucleus of endometrial epithelial and stromal cells, as well as a distinct change in localization from cytoplasmic expression to nuclear and cytoplasmic expression, compared with COEM.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the expression changes of oestrogen receptors and HIF-1a, especially GPER, are associated with AWE, which may provide new clues to understanding the cause of endometriosis.

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.

A comparison between high-intensity focused ultrasound and surgical treatment for the management of abdominal wall endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) and surgical treatment for abdominal wall endometriosis.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

Gynaecological department of a teaching hospital in China.

POPULATION

Patients with abdominal wall endometriosis.

METHODS

Among the 51 patients, 23 patients were treated with ultrasound-guided HIFU and 28 patients with surgery. Pain relief and the size change of the nodule after each management were evaluated 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment, respectively. The hospital stay and blood loss were also compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Difference between HIFU and surgical treatment for abdominal wall endometriosis.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in the pain relief in 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment, respectively. The hospital stay was clearly shorter in the HIFU group than in the surgery group. Change in nodules was more remarkable in the group treated with surgery; no palpable nodules existed in most patients in the surgery group. HIFU had more advantages over surgery, such as no blood loss, no new scar, no anaesthesia and lower pain score immediately after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our results, it appears that either HIFU or surgery is safe and effective in treating patients with AWE in short-term. Compared with surgery, HIFU treatment for AWE has the advantages of shorter hospital stay, no blood loss, no new scar, no anaesthesia and a lower immediate pain score.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Either HIFU or surgical treatment is safe and effective in treating patients with AWE. HIFU has the advantages of a less invasive procedure and shorter hospital stay.

Cesarean scar endometriosis: presentation of 198 cases and literature review

Background

Cesarean scar endometriosis (CSE) is the most common type of abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE). The aim of this study was to systematically identify the clinical features of CSE and recommend precautionary measures.

Methods

A large, retrospective study was undertaken with CSE patients treated surgically at our hospital between January 2005 and December 2017.

Results

A total of 198 CSE patients were enrolled, with a mean age of 32.0 ± 4.0 years. The main complaint of the patients was abdominal mass (98.5%), followed by cyclic pain (86.9%). The latency period of CSE was 31.6 ± 23.9 months, and the duration between the onset of symptoms and this surgery was 28.3 ± 25.0 months. A majority (80.8%, n = 160) of the patients had undergone a Pfannenstiel incision, and a minority (19.2%, n = 38) a vertical midline incision. The latency period of CSE in the case of a Pfannenstiel incision was significantly shorter than that in the case of a vertical midline incision (24.0 vs 33.0 months, P = 0.006). A total of 187 (94.4%) patients had a single endometrioma, 11 (5.6%) patients had multiple endometriomas, and the 11 multiple-endometrioma patients had all undergone a Pfannenstiel incision. Lesions of endometrioma were common in corner sites, after either incision: 142/171 (83.0%) in Pfannenstiel incision scars and 32/38 (84.2%) in vertical incision scars.

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that the Pfannenstiel incision carries a higher risk of CSE than the vertical midline incision. Thorough cleaning at the conclusion of CS, particularly of both corner sites of the adipose layer and the fascia layer, is strongly recommended for CSE prevention. Further studies might provide additional recommendations.

Clinical analysis of high-intensity focussed ultrasound ablation for abdominal wall endometriosis: a 4-year experience at a specialty gynecological institution

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term clinical effect of high-intensity focussed ultrasound (HIFU) as a non-invasive modality for ablation of abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) foci.

METHODS

All women who were diagnosed with cutaneous endometriosis and underwent HIFU ablation and 4-year follow-up were included. Patient symptoms, imaging performed, HIFU ablation, recurrence, lesion location, size and number were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 51 women with 57 painful abdominal wall masses with a median volume of 4.00 cm³ and a mean age of 30.5±2.12 years were treated with HIFU. The main symptoms were a palpable painful abdominal mass (93%), protrusion of the skin (28.1%, 16) or lack of protrusion of the skin (71.9%, 41). Ultrasound was initially performed in 100% (51) of women, whereas 6% (3) required MRI examinations to distinguish the features and range of the masses. Ablation was performed with a median 300 s of sonication time, 40 min treatment time, 150 W of power and 41800 J of total energy to treat lesions that were a median volume of 3.83 cm³. No severe complications occurred, except in one patient with a first-degree skin burn, during the 48-month follow-up period. The pooled recurrence of cutaneous endometriosis occurred in 3.9% (2) of women.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis of AWE should be confirmed with imaging of the lesion number, location, size and features before HIFU ablation. HIFU should be the first choice for the treatment of AWE as it is a non-invasive method, with high efficiency and safety and rapid postoperative recovery.

Comparison of ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation and surgery for abdominal wall endometriosis

BACKGROUND

Surgery constitutes the standard approach for abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE), but is invasive. High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) ablation is effective and safe for the treatment of AWE, but no study has compared HIFU and surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To report our experience about the benefits and adverse events of surgery compared to HIFU for the treatment of AWE.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 54 consecutive Chinese women with AWE after cesarean section treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (China) between January 2012 and December 2014. The patients underwent surgery (n = 29) or HIFU (n = 25). The technical success rate, adverse events, and recurrence were assessed.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 100% in both groups. The complete remission rate was 92.0% (23/25) in the HIFU group, and 100% (29/29) in the surgery group. Numeric rating scale (NRS) scores after HIFU were significantly improved from 6.9 to 0.3.During the median follow-up period of 32 months (range, 19-46 months), the durations of pain relief were 29.7 ± 12.6 months and 25.0 ± 13.5 months in the surgery and HIFU groups, respectively (p = .337). Three patients (10.7%) experienced pain recurrence in the surgery group, and two (8.0%) in the HIFU group. Major adverse events occurred in four (13.8%) and one (4.0%) patients in the surgery and HIFU groups, respectively (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

HIFU appears to be beneficial for the treatment of AWE, and may reduce adverse events. Compared with surgery, HIFU does not induce blood loss or tissue defects.

[Extragenital endometriosis: Parietal, thoracic, diaphragmatic and nervous lesions. CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]

According to some studies, extragenital endometriosis represents 5% of the localisations. Its prevalence seems to be underestimated. The extra pelvic localisation can make the diagnosis more difficult. Nevertheless, the recurrent and catamenial symptomatology can evoke this pathology. Surgery seems to be the unique efficient treatment for parietal lesions. Pain linked to nervous lesions (peripheric and sacral roots) seems to be underestimated and difficult to diagnose because of various localisations. Neurolysis seems to have encouraging results. Diaphragmatic lesions are often discovered either incidentally during laparoscopy, or by pulmonary symptomatology as recurrent catamenial pneumothorax or cyclic thoracic pain. Surgical treatment seems as well to be efficient.

Cutaneous endometriosis: Presentation of 33 cases and literature review

OBJECTIVE

Cutaneous endometriosis is a rare condition that usually affects the abdominal wall in women with a history of open abdominal surgery. It has a characteristic clinical picture of a mass and pain associated with menstruation. The diagnosis is difficult on being an uncommon and little known condition. Once there is suspicion, a correct anamnesis and examination is usually sufficient. The treatment is normally surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

The study included all women identified with a diagnosis of cutaneous endometriosis over a period of 20 years. The variables collected and analysed included, age, surgical history, gynaecology history, symptoms, time period between surgery and consultation, specialist consulted, location, size, tests performed, treatment, and recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 33 women were identified, with a mean age of 35.4 ± 2.33 years. A surgical history was found in 31 (93%) of 33 women. The main symptom was abdominal mass (96%), followed by period pain (51%), and non-period pain (42%). The initial diagnosis was correct in 15 (45%) of 33 women, and after performing further tests it was correct in 23 (69%) of 33 women. The main additional test was fine needle aspiration (FNA) in 24 (72%) of 33 patients. Surgery was performed on 30 (90%) of 33 women, with 8 (24%) women requiring a prosthesis. There was a recurrence of cutaneous endometriosis in 3 (9%) women.

CONCLUSION

Although it is a rare disease, its association with gynaecological surgery, and in particular caesarean section, means that there should be more awareness of this condition. Its diagnosis may be complicated due to lack of knowledge, when a proper examination and anamnesis can give us the key.

Surgical scar endometriosis: a series of 14 patients and brief review of literature

Background and aims

Endometriosis is a commonly encountered disorder in women of reproductive age, consisting of the presence of active ectopic endometrial tissue outside the endometrial cavity. Surgical scar endometriosis is a rare condition representing about 2% of all endometriosis cases. The purpose of this study was to assess the main characteristics, diagnostic tools and therapeutic options in abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE).

Methods

We have reviewed a series of fourteen cases with histopathological confirmation of AWE that were managed in our institution.

Results

The main characteristic of AWE were emphasized, showing that 78.57% of the patients had at least one previous caesarian section and that in only 57.14% of all cases an accurate diagnosis of AWE was established preoperatively.

Conclusion

A direct relationship between gynecological and obstetrical surgery and AWE is well established and as the caesarian section rates increase constantly, the awareness regarding AWE should also be increased.

Massive endometrioma presenting with dyspnea and abdominal symptoms

An abdominal mass may present with a myriad of symptoms resulting from compression of surrounding organs. A major clinical challenge with practical implications is accurate preoperative identification of the origin of the mass. Here, we present the case of a 29-year-old female patient with abdominal distension and shortness of breath for approximately 6 weeks before presentation. A large abdominal mass compressing the surrounding organs was observed on abdominal x-ray and computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis. Preoperative imaging was unable to identify the organ of origin; pathologic and histologic analyses of the tumor ultimately identified a rare, massive intra-abdominal endometrioma, freely floating within the peritoneum and fed by an omental blood supply. This case highlights the importance of considering an atypical presentation of endometriosis in women of reproductive age with abdominal complaints.

Prospective study concerning 71 cases of caesarean scar endometriosis (CSE)

A prospective study was undertaken involving 71 patients with caesarean scar endometriosis (CSE) between the years 2007 and 2013. A prospective study enabled us to find out: mean age of patients with CSE; 34.0 years (range 22.0-48.0), time between CS and diagnosis of CSE; 12.0 months (range 19.0-39.0), duration between symptoms and surgery; 24.0 months (range 1.0-204.0), mean operation time; 40.0 min. (range 15.0-160.0), and mean lesion size; 54.4 ± 42.3 mm³. In three patients (4.2%) a large deficit in the abdominal wall was closed by means of polypropylene mesh. One of them conceived a year later. Surgical excision is the only effective treatment in patients with CSE. Wide local excision with clear margins is the key to prevent recurrence. Repair of large post-excisional deficits with mesh may also be offered to woman planning their next pregnancy. Impact statement • What is already known on this subject? Endometriosis in the scar may occur after various abdominal surgeries, more frequently after caesarean sections. The excision of large nodules is connected with suboptimal cosmetic outcomes and the possibility of recurrence. • What the results of this study add? In this study including 71 patients with CSE, wide excision with electrocoagulatory was associated with a single recurrence in 12-month follow-up. In three patients (4.2%) large deficits in the abdominal wall were closed with the use of polypropylene mesh. One of them conceived a year later and had a successful pregnancy. • What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or futher research? Surgical excision is the only effective treatment in patients with CSE. Wide local excision with clear margins is the key to preventing recurrence. Repair of large post excisional deficit with mesh may be offered also to woman planning pregnancy.

Risk Factors, Clinical Presentation, and Outcomes for Abdominal Wall Endometriosis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk factors, presentation, and outcomes in cases of abdominal wall endometriosis.

DESIGN

A case-control study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

An academic medical center.

PATIENTS

A total of 102 (34 cases and 68 controls) were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical resection of abdominal wall endometriosis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Cases underwent surgical excision for abdominal wall endometriosis at Mayo Clinic from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2013. For each case, 2 controls were randomly selected from a list of women who had surgery in the same year with minimal (American Society for Reproductive Medicine stage I-II) endometriosis. A chart review was completed for variables of interest. Regression models were used to identify independent risk factors associated with abdominal wall endometriosis.

RESULTS

In 14 years, 2539 women had surgery for endometriosis at Mayo Clinic. Of these, only 34 (1.34%) had abdominal wall endometriosis. The mean age was 35.2 ± 5.9 years, and the median parity was 2 (range, 0-5). Clinical examination diagnosed abdominal wall endometriosis in 41% of cases, with the cesarean delivery scar being the most common site (59%). There was a strong correlation between the size of the lesion on clinical examination compared with the size of the pathology specimen (r² = 0.74, p < .001). When compared with controls, cases had significantly higher parity and body mass index, more cyclic localized abdominal pain, less dysmenorrhea, longer duration from the start of symptoms to surgery, and more gynecologic surgeries for symptoms without cure. In the final multivariable model, cyclic localized abdominal pain, absence of dysmenorrhea, and previous laparotomy were independently associated with abdominal wall endometriosis with adjusted odds ratios of 10.6 (95% CI 1.85-104.4, p < .001), 12.4 (95% CI 1.64-147.1, p < .001), and 70.1 (95% CI 14.8-597.7, p < .001), respectively, with an area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.87-0.98). After excision of the disease, repeat surgery was needed in 2 (5.9%) patients with a median time to recurrence of 50.5 (range, 36-65) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal wall endometriosis is a rare but unique form of endometriosis. Careful history and clinical examination can provide accurate diagnosis and avoid unnecessary delay before surgical intervention. Localized cyclic abdominal pain with the absence of dysmenorrhea and a history of prior laparotomy are independent risk factors with very high accuracy for diagnosis.

Symptomatology and Surgical Perspective of Scar Endometriosis: A Case Series of 16 Women

AIM

The prevalence of scar endometriosis is increasing with the increasing caesarean deliveries and laparoscopic procedures done for pelvic endometriosis. To analyse the symptomatology and surgical perspective of scar endometriosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 16 women who underwent surgery for scar endometriosis in the period of 4 years in Amrita institute of medical sciences.

RESULTS

Mean age of the patients is 35.19 years. Mean interval from the index surgery to the presentation is 4.56 years. Mean size of the swelling is 2.84 cm. In 68.8% of the patients, caesarean section was the inciting surgery. 18.7% had port site endometriosis. Cyclical pain and swelling at the scar site was present in 93.8% of the women. 18.9% had concurrent pelvic endometriosis. All women had involvement of the subcutaneous tissue followed by 11 women with the involvement of rectus sheath. There was no recurrence of the lesion in the operated patients in the mean follow-up period of 11.91 months.

CONCLUSION

In all women presenting with cyclical scar site pain and swelling, scar endometriosis should be considered. It commonly follows caesarean section and laparoscopic surgeries done for endometriosis. Wide local excision with or without reconstruction is the method of choice for this condition. Role of tumescent solution during surgery and postoperative medical management to reduce recurrence needs further prospective studies.

[Clear cell adenocarcinoma arising from abdominal wall endometriosis]

BACKGROUND

Clear cell carcinoma originating in the abdominal wall is a rare event. It is generally associated with endometrial tissue implants left behind after a caesarean section or other gynaecological operations. Its pathophysiology is complex and controversial.

CLINICAL CASE

The case is presented of a 45 year-old female with history of three caesarean sections, who was seen due to having a tumour mass of 6 months onset in the anterior abdominal wall. Imaging studies confirmed its location, and due to measuring 9 by 7 cm it was suspected to be an urachal tumour. A resection with wide margins was performed. The histopathology report was of a clear cell adenocarcinoma originated in ectopic endometrial tissue, with negative margins.

CONCLUSION

This is a very rare case, with few cases reported in the literature. This diagnosis should be included in tumours of the abdominal wall.

5-Year data analysis of patients following abdominal wall endometrioma surgery

Background

Endometriosis is a disorder in which an ectopic endometrial tissue grows outside the uterine cavity. The ectopic endometrium embedded in the subcutaneous fatty layer and the muscles of abdominal wall is called as abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE). AWE is a rare condition; however, it is usually known to develop along with previous surgical scars. Caesarean section and hysterectomy are considered to be commonly associated with the development of AWE.

Methods

We evaluated the data of the patients who underwent AWE surgery between March 2009 and March 2014.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 32.5 years. We found a previous history of caesarean section in all of the patients. The most frequent symptoms of the patients were abdominal mass sensation and abdominal pain. Invasion of endometriosis to fat layer, fascia, muscular layer, and peritoneum was recorded. Three masses were located within the scar regions.

Conclusions

We can conclude that there is a high prevalence of caesarean sections among the women with AWE.

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.