» Articles » PMID: 33725313

A Detailed Study in Adenomyosis and Endometriosis: Evaluation of the Rate of Coexistence Between Uterine Adenomyosis and DIE According to Imaging and Histopathology Findings

Overview
Journal Reprod Sci
Publisher Springer
Date 2021 Mar 16
PMID 33725313
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The current study was designed to evaluate the relationship between adenomyosis and its subtypes with endometriotic lesions (ovarian endometrioma (OMAs) and posterior deep infiltrative endometriosis (DIE)), to examine the probability of existence of a common cause of these mysterious diseases, and to evaluate the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of both transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS) and MRI in diagnosis of adenomyotic uterus. In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we selected 154 women with coexistence of endometriosis and adenomyosis according to their imaging, intraoperative, or pathological findings who were nominated for laparoscopic surgery. Eighty-six patients with just DIE resection without LH (laparoscopic hysterectomy) (group 1), and 68 patients with LH + DIE resection (group 2). The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of ultrasonographic and MRI findings for diagnosing adenomyosis were 72.1%, 77.6%, 40.0% and 49.2%, 41.5%, 90.0% respectively. So, TVS is a more sensitive diagnostic tool for diagnosing adenomyosis. However, MRI was more specific than TVS in the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis especially with simultaneous presence of uterine leiomyoma. Regarding the association of different types of adenomyosis (focal and diffuse) with different endometriosis lesions (OMA and posterior compartment DIE), we just found diffuse type of adenomyosis more frequent in the absence of rectal and rectovaginal septum (RVS) DIE (p ≤ 0.05). In addition to the questionable different nature of rectal and RVS DIE lesion, there is no relationship between adenomyosis subtypes and endometriotic lesions.

Citing Articles

A stacked machine learning-based classification model for endometriosis and adenomyosis: a retrospective cohort study utilizing peripheral blood and coagulation markers.

Wang W, Zeng W, Yang S Front Digit Health. 2024; 6:1463419.

PMID: 39347446 PMC: 11428011. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2024.1463419.


Assessment of the Ferroptosis Regulators: Glutathione Peroxidase 4, Acyl-Coenzyme A Synthetase Long-Chain Family Member 4, and Transferrin Receptor 1 in Patient-Derived Endometriosis Tissue.

Mielke Cabello L, Meresman G, Darici D, Carnovale N, Heitkotter B, Schulte M Biomolecules. 2024; 14(7).

PMID: 39062590 PMC: 11274870. DOI: 10.3390/biom14070876.


The Impact of Endometriosis on Pregnancy.

Tsikouras P, Oikonomou E, Bothou A, Chaitidou P, Kyriakou D, Nikolettos K J Pers Med. 2024; 14(1).

PMID: 38276248 PMC: 10820275. DOI: 10.3390/jpm14010126.


The Asian Society of Endometriosis and Adenomyosis guidelines for managing adenomyosis.

Harada T, Taniguchi F, Guo S, Choi Y, Biberoglu K, Tsai S Reprod Med Biol. 2023; 22(1):e12535.

PMID: 37701076 PMC: 10493363. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12535.


Value of Transabdominal Combined Transvaginal Color Doppler Ultrasonography in the Distinguish between Uterine Adenomyoma and Uterine Fibroids.

Qi H, Zhou C, Huang Z, Yang N, Wu Q Biomed Res Int. 2022; 2022:9599571.

PMID: 35845931 PMC: 9283036. DOI: 10.1155/2022/9599571.

References
1.
Bazot M, Darai E . Role of transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(3):389-397. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.024. View

2.
Van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone F, Valentin L, Rasmussen C, Votino A . Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 46(3):284-98. DOI: 10.1002/uog.14806. View

3.
Kunz G, Beil D, Huppert P, Leyendecker G . Structural abnormalities of the uterine wall in women with endometriosis and infertility visualized by vaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Reprod. 1999; 15(1):76-82. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.1.76. View

4.
Yasui T, Hayashi K, Nagai K, Mizunuma H, Kubota T, Lee J . Risk profiles for endometriosis in Japanese women: results from a repeated survey of self-reports. J Epidemiol. 2015; 25(3):194-203. PMC: 4340996. DOI: 10.2188/jea.JE20140124. View

5.
Leyendecker G, Bilgicyildirim A, Inacker M, Stalf T, Huppert P, Mall G . Adenomyosis and endometriosis. Re-visiting their association and further insights into the mechanisms of auto-traumatisation. An MRI study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014; 291(4):917-32. PMC: 4355446. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-014-3437-8. View