Abstract
Introduction. Deciduosis is an ectopic transformation of connective tissue into decidual-like cells. This is
the first systematic review describing the clinical course, associated pregnancy complications, and
management outcomes of cervical and vaginal deciduosis.
Methods. Our search covered worldwide observational studies published in English in five databases
(PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Europe PMC, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar) from inception to
February 24, 2023. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis
(PRISMA) guidelines and critically appraised studies using CAse REport (CARE) and Joanna Briggs Institute
(JBI) tools. Then, we extracted patient characteristics, clinical features, management-related information,
and outcomes.
Results. The selection process identified 15 studies describing 30 pregnancies. Macroscopic cervical and
vaginal deciduosis presented as recurrent vaginal bleeding in over 16 of 24 women (57%). Differential
diagnoses included miscarriages, cervical pregnancy, placenta previa, and malignancy. Significant antenatal
hemorrhages, preterm rupture of membranes, and preterm birth were the most frequent pregnancy
complications. Only one of 27 electively performed procedures resulted in biopsy-induced uncontrolled
vaginal bleeding (0.04%), suggesting the relative safety of the interventions. Lesion resection led to the
cessation of recurrent symptoms in eight of eight patients (100%) compared to eight of 15 women (53%)
under observation management. All women with polypoid deciduosis over 1.5 cm entered labor and
delivered without complications.
Conclusions. We described the clinical course, pregnancy complications, diagnostic-related challenges,
management, and associated outcomes in women with macroscopic cervical and vaginal deciduosis. We
supported the analysis with the current state of the problem and discovered gaps for prospective studies.
Categories:
Obstetrics/Gynecology
Keywords
antenatal bleeding, polypectomy, decidual polyp, decidual ectopy, systematic review
Introduction
And Background
Deciduosis, an extra-uterine transformation of connective tissue into decidual-resembling cells, mainly
occurs during pregnancy. Microscopically, 70.2% of biopsies obtained during a cesarean section
[1]
and
15.2%-34% of cervical cytological smears
[2,3]
, as well as up to 90% of cervical biopsies
[4]
, revealed decidual
cells. The incidence of macroscopic lesions is unknown.
Deciduosis is generally considered a benign reaction. However, it might lead to significant pregnancy
complications and management challenges. Existing systematic reviews
[5-7]
listed deciduosis-associated
complications, such as spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy, (peri)appendicitis, bowel perforation,
endometriotic lesion decidualization, disruptions of such lesions (especially threatening when
approximated to vulnerable areas like uterine vessels and ureters), urinary bladder or ovarian pseudotumor
formation, hemothorax, catamenial pneumothorax, etc. However, to our best knowledge, no systematic
review has analyzed deciduosis confined to the lower genital tract location and its impact on pregnancy.
Moving externally from the endocervix, deciduosis of the lower genital tract presents as polyp and ectopy,
including its papillary, polypoid, and infiltrative forms
[8]
. Polyp and papillary ectopy arise from the stroma
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
Open Access Review
Article
DOI:
10.7759/cureus.44479
How to cite this article
Bolgarina Z, Desai H N, Senaratne M, et al. (August 31, 2023) Cervical and Vaginal Deciduosis: Insights on Management and a Systematic Review
of Observational Studies on Pregnancy Complications and Management Outcomes (Including Vaginal Birth). Cureus 15(8): e44479.
DOI
10.7759/cureus.44479
under the columnar epithelium and appear as multicolored "beans" and pale grape-like columnar epithelial
villi enlargement, respectively. Polypoid ectopy occurs under the columnar and squamous epithelium,
frequently includes a transformation zone, and presents as a friable, yellow-brown mass. Infiltrative ectopy
originates under the squamous epithelium as multiple small elevations. Lesion ulceration is common.
Studies identified that pregnancy-associated changes in the cervix, including decidual cells or the Arias-
Stella reaction, are sometimes mistakenly recognized as atypical
[9,10]
. Colposcopic impressions can be
misleading while performing a biopsy during pregnancy might be risky because of the possibility of excessive
bleeding and coincidental pregnancy complications
[11]
. Contrary to popular belief, it is most important to
rule out the coexistence of malignancy in suspicious cases.
Accumulated data suggest that cervical deciduosis increases the risks of late miscarriages and preterm birth
because of a premature rupture of membranes
[12-14]
. Besides, large lesions in labor, especially those that
lead to intrapartum bleeding, can raise additional challenges
[15-16]
.
Therefore, this study aims to review the clinical course and management of pregnancies in patients with
deciduosis of the lower genital tract. We have included all the possible pregnancy complications and
analyzed the incidence of intervention-associated complications, symptoms, and lesion resolution according
to the chosen management and, if lesions persisted, the size of the lesions and problems accompanying
vaginal delivery. Summarizing these data, we describe the possible challenges, pregnancy complications,
and management outcomes. Additionally, we discover knowledge gaps that might serve as a guide for
subsequent report descriptions.
Review
Methods
Search Strategy and Selection Process
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines
released in 2020 to prepare a systematic review
[17]
. Our search strategy, using keywords such as deciduosis,
ectopic decidua, ectopic decidual reaction, and ectopic decidualization, was introduced in five databases
(PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Europe PMC, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar) and retrieved the
References
from inception to February 24, 2023. Complete queries and the search results are provided in
Table
1
.
Databases
Queries
Results
PubMed
Deciduosis OR "Ectopic decidua" OR "Ectopic decidual reaction" OR "Ectopic decidualization" Filters: Case
Reports, Observational Study
77
a
PMC
((Deciduosis) OR "Ectopic decidua") OR "Ectopic decidual reaction") OR "Ectopic decidualization"
159
Europe PMC
("Deciduosis" OR "Ectopic decidua" OR "Ectopic decidual reaction" OR "Ectopic decidualization")
215
ScienceDirect
"Deciduosis" OR "Ectopic decidua" OR "Ectopic decidual reaction" OR "Ectopic decidualization"
99
b
Google
Scholar
"Deciduosis" OR "Ectopic decidua" OR "Ectopic decidual reaction" OR "Ectopic decidualization"
980
TABLE
1: The databases, search queries, and results
The initial search showed:
a
139 results on PubMed (applied filters: case reports, observational study);
b
249 results on ScienceDirect (applied filters: case
reports, research articles)
PMC: PubMed Central
Following the search, we uploaded the citations into the EndNote software (Clarivate, Philadelphia, PA,
USA) and shared them among the authors (ZB, HD, MS). Then, two reviewers (ZB and HD) independently
proceeded with the identification and screening process. They were consulted by a third author (MS)
whenever disagreements arose. After removing the duplicates, non-English, and irrelevant records, full-text
articles were retrieved and reviewed for eligibility criteria, as provided in Table
2
.
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
2
of
13
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
1. Population: Pregnant women with lower genital tract deciduosis.
1. Associated ectopic or molar pregnancy
2. Phenomenon of interest: Clinical course of the pregnancies and unique difficulties
2. Type of studies: non-primary studies
3. Outcomes: Pregnancy complications and management-related outcomes
3. ‘Grey’ literature, including unpublished studies
4. Types of studies: Case reports, case series, and case-control studies
4. Animal studies
5. Human studies
6. Time: Published from the inception to February 24, 2023.
7. Location: Worldwide
8. Language: Articles written in English
9. Free full-text articles
TABLE
2: Full eligibility criteria
Besides, checking reference lists retrieved three additional studies for the analysis. During the whole
process, we did not use any automatic tools. The entire process is shown in Figure
1
.
FIGURE
1: PRISMA flow diagram on the selection of studies
PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis; PMC: PubMed Central
Data Collection and Synthesis
The same reviewers extracted data to a Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) file
independently according to the previously chosen variables and outcomes, which were as follows: (1)
patients' characteristics included age, parity, preexisting history of cervical pathology and its treatment, and
the results of cervical cancer screening; (2) clinical features included location, form, and size of the lower
genital tract deciduosis, course of previous pregnancies, clinical presentation while establishing the
diagnosis, and differential diagnosis; (3) management-related parameters: weeks of gestation (WG), results
of the cytology and colposcopy and associated challenges, interventions (biopsy, polypectomy or removal of
polypoid masses, or their combinations), and postpartum follow-up results within eight weeks; and (4)
outcomes: (a) pregnancy complications, such as significant hemorrhages, pregnancy loss, intraamniotic
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
3
of
13
infection (IAI) and/or preterm rupture of the membranes (PROM), preterm birth, cesarean section, etc.; and
(b) management-associated results (intervention-associated complications, symptom resolution or
persistence according to the chosen management, spontaneous regression of lesions during observation,
and, if lesions persisted, their size and vaginal birth outcomes).
We made certain assumptions whenever information could not be recovered or clarified. If the authors
reported multiple elevations on the cervix, we suspected an
infiltrative form
of deciduosis
[18,19]
. When the
authors described the lesion as a single ectocervical or vaginal "mass," we interpreted it as a
polypoid form
of
ectopy
[20-22]
. We recognized the case of having a decidual polyp during the previous pregnancy as
a
polyp
[23]
. In one case, it was hard to differentiate a polyp from a potentially papillary form of deciduosis
or expulsed fragments of the decidua described as the endocervical "grayish membranes"
[24]
. If
vaginal
bleeding
was not followed by any emergent workup, we considered it insignificant. Additional workup to rule
out differential nosologies and concerns mentioned in the discussion sections of the articles contributed to
the
differential diagnosis
analysis. We also recalculated the patient’s
age
based on the provided chronology
[25]
and the
term of gestation
based on the last menstrual period day or, if unavailable, the confinement date
or size of uterus enlargement
[22,23]
. The
"reassuring" result of cytology
was interpreted as normal
[19]
. Given
the diverse terms of gestation and circumstances of revealing the pathology, we
categorized pregnancies as
managed expectantly
if: (1) there were no planned interventions
[24,26]
; (2) patients underwent urgent or
emergent procedures
[27,28]
; (3) unprovoked pregnancy complications led to pregnancy termination
[20,25]
;
or (4) patients presented initially after 37WG
[15,16,21,23]
. When reports included a scheduled remote
postpartum follow-up for cervix re-evaluation within eight weeks, we suspected
lesion persistence
[19,22,28]
.
We excluded underreported and unrestored information from the corresponding analysis, marking them as
"not reported" or "not applicable." The extracted data is organized in Tables
3
-
5
.
Author, Year
(Country)
Age
Parity
Preexisting cervical
pathology/treatment and cancer
screening
Location
Form (size)
Symptoms at the time of
revealing the pathology
Preexisted
pregnancy
course
Differential diagnosis
Oh et al., 2022
(Korea)
[20]
33
0
NR
Upper third of the
vagina
Polypoid (RV DIE
6.1×4.1 cm)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
Vaginal cancer, DIE
malignization
Batkoska et al., 2022
(Slovenia)
[25]
27
0
CIN3/LLETZ 5Y prior
Cervix
Polyp (2.2×1 cm)
VB
NR
None
28
0
CIN3/LLETZ 6Y prior
Cervix
Polyp (4×1 cm)
Malodorous VD
NR
None
29
0
CIN3/LLETZ 7Y prior
Cervix
Polyp (4×2 cm)
Resolved VB
NR
None
Verma et al., 2022
(India)
[18]
28
2
NR
Cervix
Infiltrative (0.5-to-1.5
cm)
Resolved VB
NR
Cervical cancer
Buttery et al., 2021
(Australia)
[16]
22
0
NR
Cervix
Polypoid (large)
NR
NR
Placenta previa
Mangla et al., 2021
(India)
[27]
28
0
NR
Cervix
Polyp (2×2 cm)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
None
Xiaoyin et al., 2018
(China)
[26]
32
1
NR
Cervix
Polyp (0.8 cm)
VB
NR
NR
25
0
NR
Cervix
Infiltrative/Polypoid (1
cm)
VB
NR
NR
27
0
NR
Cervix
Ulcerated + Polyp
VB
NR
NR
37
1
NR
Cervix
Polyp (2 cm)
Recurrent VD/VB
Recurrent
VD/VB
NR
28
0
NR
Cervix
Infiltrative/Polypoid (2
cm)
VB
NR
NR
22
0
NR
Cervix
Papillary + Polyp
Recurrent VD/VB
Recurrent
VD/VB
NR
37
0
NR
Cervix
Polypoid (1.5 cm)
VD/VB
NR
NR
29
0
NR
Cervix
Infiltrative + Polyp (2
cm)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
NR
27
0
NR
Cervix
Ulcerated/Polypoid
(1.5 cm)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
NR
26
0
NR
Cervix
Polyp (1 cm)
VB
NR
NR
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
4
of
13
23
0
NR
Cervix
Papillary/Polypoid (2
cm)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
NR
van Diepen et al.,
2015 (Netherlands)
[19]
34
0
CIN3/LLETZ 1Y prior; Cytology:
Normal 0.5Y and 1Y prior
Cervix
Infiltrative (0.5-to-1.5
cm)
VB
NR
Polyps, cervical adenoma
Oladipo et al., 2005
(UK)
[28]
28
0
Insignificant history; Cytology:
Normal 1Y prior
Cervix
Polypoid (4×4 cm)
VB of “300 ml”
“Uneventful”
Placenta previa or
abruption
Gornall et al., 2000
(UK)
[15]
23
0
Cytology: Normal 2Y prior
Cervix
Polypoid (8 cm)
PROM
“Offensive” VD
Cervical cancer
Armenia et al., 1964
(USA)
[23]
22
2
Unremarkable cervix at 24WG
Cervix
Polypoid
None
Unremarkable
Primary reticulum cell
sarcoma
22
3
Previous pregnancy: 1-cm decidual
polyp
Cervix
Polyp (6 cm)
VB
VB
“Undifferentiated tumor of
reticuloendothelial origin”
Orr et al., 1961
(Northern Ireland)
[29]
26
1
“Erosion”/Diathermy
Cervix + Upper
third of the
vagina
Polypoid (large)
Recurrent VB
Recurrent VB
Placenta previa, carcinoma
Mathie, 1957 (UK)
[30]
39
2
NR
Upper third of the
vagina
Polypoid (large)
None
“Uneventful”
Cervical, then vaginal
carcinoma
Spivack, 1949 (USA)
[24]
31
1
NR
Cervix
Infiltrative + "grayish
membranes" (1.5 cm)
Worsened leukorrhea
Leukorrhea
Miscarriage, ectopic
pregnancy
Lapan, 1949 (USA)
[22]
33
0
“Normal”
Cervix + Upper
third of the
vagina
Polypoid (large)
Profuse VB
VB worsening
Cervical cancer
35
1
NR
Upper third of the
vagina
Polypoid (large)
None
NR
Vaginal cancer
31
1
“Normal”
Cervix
Polypoid (large)
None
NR
Anaplastic cancer
Klein et al., 1946
(USA)
[21]
23
0
12WG: No polyps, "erosions", or
growths
Cervix
Polypoid (2 cm)
VB (“cupful”)
"Uneventful"
Placenta previa, cervical
cancer
TABLE
3: Data extraction of the clinical characteristics
NR: not reported; RV: rectovaginal; DIE: deep infiltrative endometriosis; VB: vaginal bleeding; CIN3: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 3); LLETZ:
large loop excision of the transformation zone; Y: year(s); VD: vaginal discharge; PROM: preterm rupture of membranes; WG: weeks of gestation
Author, Year
(Country)
WG
a
Cytology
Colposcopy
Biopsy(ies)
Ectomy of
lesions
Postpartum
follow-up within
8 weeks
Oh et al., 2022
(Korea)
[20]
34WG
NR
NR
N/A (Active VB)
None
NR
Batkoska et al.,
2022 (Slovenia)
[25]
6WG
NR
Polyp
None
Polypectomy
N/A (Removed)
10WG
NR
NR
None
None
N/A (Removed vs.
Regressed)
7WG
NR
NR
None
Polypectomy
N/A (Removed)
Verma et al., 2022
(India)
[18]
32WG
NR
NR
Biopsy
None
Speculum:
Normal; Cytology:
NILM
Buttery et al., 2021
(Australia)
[16]
41WG
NR
NR
None (Intraoperative)
None
NR
Mangla et al., 2021
(India)
[27]
20WG
NR
NR
None
Urgent
polypectomy
N/A (Removed)
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
5
of
13
at 24WG
Xiaoyin et al., 2018
(China)
[26]
8WG
NILM
Polyp
None
None
N/A (Regressed)
21WG
NILM
Ectopy
Biopsy
Polypectomy
b
at 24WG
N/A (Removed)
19WG
NILM
Polyp/Ectopy
Biopsy
None
N/A (Regressed)
10WG
NILM
Polyp
Biopsy
Polypectomy
at 12WG
N/A (Removed)
15WG
NILM
Ectopy
Biopsy
None
NR
16WG
NILM
Polyp/Ectopy
Biopsy
Polypectomy
b
at 19WG
N/A (Removed)
7WG
NILM
Ectopy
Biopsy
Polypectomy
b
at 12WG
N/A (Removed)
23WG
NILM
Polyp/Ectopy
Biopsy
Polypectomy
b
at 27WG
N/A (Removed)
32WG
NILM
Ectopy
Biopsy
None
NR
8WG
NILM
Polyp
None
None
N/A (Regressed)
28WG
NILM
Ectopy
Biopsy
Polypectomy
b
at 31WG
N/A (Removed)
van Diepen et al.,
2015
(Netherlands)
[19]
11WG
Normal
Acetic acid: "no abnormalities"
Colposcopy-guided
biopsy at 25WG
None
Speculum: Almost
resolved;
Cytology: Normal
Oladipo et al.,
2005 (UK)
[28]
28WG
NR
Unsatisfactory Acetic acid:
“grayish-white”, fine
punctuations, "atypical vessels"
Colposcopy-guided,
multiple biopsies
(Urgent settings)
None
Colposcopy:
Normal
Gornall et al., 2000
(UK)
[15]
38WG
NR
NR
Biopsies
None
Speculum:
Normal;
Colposcopy:
Normal
Armenia et al.,
1964 (USA)
[23]
39WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
NR
None
Hysterectomy:
0.1×0.8 cm nodule
15WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy; Biopsies at
17WG
None
Cold knife
conization: normal
Orr et al., 1961
(Northern Ireland)
[29]
36WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy
None
Speculum: Almost
resolved
Mathie, 1957 (UK)
[30]
28WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy
None
Speculum: Normal
Spivack, 1949
(USA)
[24]
10WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
None (pseudobiopsy
c
)
None
Speculum:
"Inflamed and
eroded”
Lapan, 1949
(USA)
[22]
12WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy
None
Speculum:
"Erosion”; Biopsy:
Diffuse
adenomatosis
12WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy
None
Speculum: Normal
˂12WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
Biopsy
None
Speculum: Normal
Klein et al., 1946
(USA)
[21]
41WG
NR
N/A (Old study)
None
None
Speculum:
“Erosion”; Biopsy:
Normal
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
6
of
13
TABLE
4: Data extraction of the management results
WG: weeks of gestation; NR: not reported; N/A: not applicable; VB: vaginal bleeding; NILM: negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy; cm:
centimeter(s)
a
The column "WG" refers to the initial revealing of pathology. The term of gestation for delayed or additional procedures was mentioned additionally in the
corresponding fields.
b
The term polypectomy included polypectomy and/or removal of the ectopic mass.
c
The term pseudobiopsy means gentle tissue removal without obtaining a baseline layer.
Author, Year
(Country)
Pregnancy
complications
Pregnancy course and immediate postpartum period
Vaginal birth:
delivered/complication
(peripartum size of the lesions)
Planned procedure:
Uneventful/Complication
Observation (including
biopsy)/Polypectomy: Symptom(s)
resolution or recurrence
Regression of lesions
(if no ectomy was
performed)
Oh et al., 2022
(Korea)
[20]
VB/Shock,
Uterine scar,
Preterm birth
N/A (Emergent settings)
Observation: Recurrent VB
N/A (Emergent C-
section)
N/A (Emergent C-section)
Batkoska et al.,
2022 (Slovenia)
[25]
N/A (Remote
missed abortion)
Polypectomy:
Uneventful
Polypectomy: VB resolved
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Missed abortion)
IAI/PROM, Late
pregnancy loss
N/A (None)
Observation: Recurrent VB and
UTI
N/A (Unknown:
Removed vs.
Regressed)
N/A (Late pregnancy loss)
N/A
(Polypectomy)
Polypectomy:
Uneventful
Polypectomy: VB resolved
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
Verma et al.,
2022 (India)
[18]
Uterine scar,
Preterm birth
Biopsy: Uncontrolled VB
Observation: NR
N/A (Urgent C-
section)
N/A (Urgent C-section)
Buttery et al.,
2021 (Australia)
[16]
Uterine scar
N/A (Intraoperative)
Observation: NR
Persisted
Early stage of labor complicated by
VB/fetal distress (entire posterior lip
of the cervix)
Mangla et al.,
2021 (India)
[27]
VB/Shock
N/A (Urgent
polypectomy)
Observation: Recurrent VB; Urgent
polypectomy: NR
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
Xiaoyin et al.,
2018 (China)
[26]
NR
N/A (None)
Observation: NR
Regressed at 12WG
N/A (Regressed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy
a
:
Uneventful
Polypectomy
a
: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful
Observation: Recurrent VB
Regressed at 35WG
N/A (Regressed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy:
Uneventful
Polypectomy: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful
Observation: Recurrent VB
Persisted
NR
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy
a
:
Uneventful
Polypectomy
a
: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy
a
:
Uneventful
Polypectomy
a
: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy
a
:
Uneventful
Polypectomy
a
: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
7
of
13
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful
Observation: Recurrent VB
Persisted
NR
NR
N/A (None)
Observation: NR
Regressed at 20WG
N/A (Regressed)
NR
Biopsy: Uneventful;
Polypectomy
a
:
Uneventful
Polypectomy
a
: Recurrent VB
resolution
N/A (Removed)
N/A (Removed)
van Diepen et al.,
2015
(Netherlands)
[19]
N/A (C-section
due to failure to
progress)
Biopsy: Uneventful
Observation: NR
Persisted
N/A (Failure to progress)
Oladipo et al.,
2005 (UK)
[28]
Severe VB
N/A (Urgent settings)
Observation: "Without further
complications"
Persisted
Delivered
Gornall et al.,
2000 (UK)
[15]
IAI/PROM,
Uterine scar
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: “Offensive” VD
Persisted
N/A (Emergent C-section)
Armenia et al.,
1964 (USA)
[23]
None
NR
Observation: "Uneventful"
Persisted
Delivered (1.5×0.6×0.4 cm)
None
15WG Biopsy:
Uneventful; 17WG
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: NR
Persisted
Delivered (2 cm)
Orr et al., 1961
(Northern
Ireland)
[29]
N/A (None)
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: Recurrent VB
Persisted
Delivered (large)
Mathie, 1957
(UK)
[30]
“Mild toxemia”
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: Provoked VB
Persisted
IOL followed by mild VB (large)
Spivack, 1949
(USA)
[24]
N/A (None)
N/A (Pseudobiopsy
b
)
Observation: Recurrent
VB/Persisted leucorrhea
NR
NR vs. Regressed?
Lapan, 1949
(USA)
[22]
N/A (None)
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: Provoked profuse VB
Persisted
Delivered
N/A (None)
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: "Uneventful"
NR
NR vs. Regressed?
N/A (None)
Biopsies: Uneventful
Observation: NR
Persisted
Delivered
Klein et al., 1946
(USA)
[21]
Profuse VB
Early postpartum
biopsy: VB
Observation: "Uneventful"
Persisted
Delivered (2 cm)
TABLE
5: Data extraction of the outcomes
VB: vaginal bleeding; N/A: not applicable; C-section: caesarean section; IAI: intraamniotic infection; PROM: preterm rupture of membranes; UTI: urinary
tract infection(s); NR: not reported; WG: weeks of gestation; VD: vaginal discharge; cm: centimeter(s); IOL: induction of labor
a
The term polypectomy included polypectomy and/or removal of the ectopic mass.
b
The term pseudobiopsy means gentle tissue removal without obtaining a baseline layer.
After completing the data extraction, two reviewers (ZB and HD) critically appraised the studies
independently by using the CAse REport (CARE) assessment tool for case reports
[31]
and the Joanna Briggs
Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools for case series
[32]
. The third reviewer (MS) resolved doubts and
disagreements. The studies that scored 70% or higher contributed to our systematic review. This threshold
was lowered to 60% for the studies published before 2013, as we did not want to lose clinically relevant
information due to differences in the requirements of reporting cases.
We summarized clinically relevant qualitative variables by frequencies and presented them as percentages
supported by a numerator and denominator. Continuous variables were presented as the mean and range in
a normal data distribution and the median and interquartile range in a non-normal data distribution.
We did not develop the protocol and register the systematic review at the International Prospective Register
of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) due to the short timeline for its completion. The protocol was
substituted with data extraction tables in Microsoft Excel and subsequent analysis.
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
8
of
13
Results
Our search strategy identified 1745 records. After removing the duplicates (n = 443), foreign language
articles (n = 162), and, partially, irrelevant reports whenever filters could be applied (n = 212), 928 records
underwent screening. The inability to retrieve four reports limited our assessment for eligibility to only 24
records; of those, we excluded nine studies due to the wrong population (n = 5)
[33-37]
, wrong publication
type (n = 1)
[8]
, and incompleteness of the presented data for the analysis (n = 3)
[14,38,39]
. Finally, 15 of 17
studies scored from 63% to 100% during the critical appraisal process and were subject to analysis
[15,16,18-
30]
; 14 case reports, and one case series describing 30 cases.
Patients' Characteristics
The mean patient age was 28 years (± 4.86). Nulliparous women represented the majority - 18 of 30 women
(60%). Among preexisting pathologies, there was a history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 3)
treated with loop electrosurgical excision of the transformation (four cases), cervical "erosion" treated with
diathermy (one case), and recurrent decidual polyps (three cases).
Clinical Presentation
Lesions were localized at the cervix (83%, 25 of 30 reports), the upper third of the vagina (10%, three of 30
reports), or both locations (7%, two of 30 cases). Among the 22 reported cases of ectopies (73%), 40%
accounted for polypoid (12 cases), 10% were infiltrative (three cases), and 23% were coexisting forms (seven
cases).
Clinically, deciduosis presented an accidental finding only in four of 29 patients (14%). The rest of the
patients complained of leukorrhea or infectious vaginal discharge (21%, six of 29 women) and/or vaginal
bleeding, which was the chief complaint in 22 of 29 women (76%) and had a recurrent character in more
than 16 of 24 patients (57%) based on the previous and subsequent course of the pregnancies.
Differential diagnoses included threatened abortion and ectopic pregnancy (one case), cervical adenoma
(one patient), placenta previa (four cases), and cervical or vaginal malignancy (11 cases), including one
patient with suspicious rectovaginal deep infiltrative endometriosis malignization.
Management
Deciduosis was revealed before 24WG in 18 of 30 pregnancies (60%). All reported cytological findings were
normal. Only one study documented the details of colposcopy. According to that study, the possible
challenges are incomplete visualization of the transformation zone, "grayish-white" epithelium after
applying acetic acid, and "atypical vessels."
Eleven of the patients were managed expectantly (37%). The rest of the pregnant women underwent a total
of 27 planned procedures: before 24WG (12 cases), during 24-to-33 6/7WG (seven cases), and after 34WG
(eight cases). In the eight weeks postpartum, five of 12 patients (42%) had residual findings, including
"erosions" and diffuse adenomatosis.
Outcomes
Studies reported the following complications of the pregnancies: significant antenatal bleeding (four
studies), late abortion (one case), IAI and/or PROM (two cases), preterm birth (two cases), and operative
delivery with uterine scar formation (four patients).
Among the 27 scheduled procedures, only one case of uncontrolled vaginal bleeding occurred at 32WG
(0.04%).
Observation, including pregnancies managed expectantly or biopsied, was followed by recurrent symptoms
(vaginal bleeding, urinary tract infections, vaginal discharge) or uneventfully (none, single, or provoked
episode) in eight (53%) and seven (47%) women, respectively. Recurrent vaginal bleeding resolved in all
eight cases (100%) of performed polyp or polypoid mass ectomies.
Spontaneous regression of lesions during observation happened in 20% (three of 16 patients) at 12WG,
20WG, and 35WG. All of these lesions were polyps, including one case of ulcerated ectopy.
Nine studies reported lesion persistence until vaginal birth. Almost all of these women had large polypoid
lesions during their pregnancies. Among them, six women entered labor with the reported size of the lesions
ranging from 1.5-2 cm to "large." None of the cases were complicated with significant intrapartum
hemorrhage, although one study reported fetal distress of unknown etiology in the early stage of labor.
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
9
of
13
Discussion
Deciduosis of the lower genital tract was observed in women of 22 to 39 years of age, appearing on the
cervix (83%) and/or vaginal fornices. Unfortunately, most case reports did not report the prior history of
cervical or vaginal pathologies, limiting the opportunity to suggest the recurrence nature of the pathology,
although decidual polyps demonstrated the tendency
[23,25]
.
We noted that macroscopic cervix and/or vaginal fornice deciduosis was most commonly symptomatic,
presenting as recurrent painless vaginal bleeding in more than half of the patients. Three pregnancies with
lesions exceeding 2 cm in diameter were complicated by spontaneous antenatal hemorrhage of over 250 ml
between 24WG and 34WG
[20,27-28]
. According to the literature, the lesions start regression around 25WG
and, in 60%-70%, disappear completely by 38WG
[8]
. Because of this, it seems reasonable to diagnose the
condition early, while ruling out cancer and locating the placenta, and consider respiratory distress
syndrome prevention, especially if a biopsy is unavoidable during the late term of gestation.
Reviewing a previous history of cervical dysplasia, its treatment, and subsequent surveillance, including
cervical cytology obtained in the first trimester of pregnancy, might help establish the diagnosis while
minimizing the risks associated with cervical biopsy. For example, in one study
[19]
, a patient underwent
treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 3) with subsequent normal cytological results before
conception. She developed an infiltrative form of deciduosis, followed by reassuring cytological plus
colposcopy surveillance until 25WG when the biopsy was performed because of the growth of the lesions.
This case highlights the importance of cervical cancer screening before 20WG
[40]
when the lesions do not
obscure the transformation zone and awareness of the pathology (in this case, the infiltrative form does not
include the transformation zone and is multifocal form, therefore can allow avoiding a biopsy). Moreover,
the absence of a high-grade pattern, surrounding foci of lower-grade abnormalities, and intensive necrosis
of the lesions during colposcopy might help to avoid biopsy if local guidelines do not require it, regardless of
the dense whitening of the lesions. However, it is the polypoid form that seems to be the most problematic
one from a differential perspective and the most reported form of ectopy (58%), as it includes a
transformation zone. In addition to taking a history and performing the mentioned diagnostics, this form of
deciduosis presents as confusingly friable compared to relatively solid cancer. The less frequently reported
form of ectopy was the papillary one, which may be the less recognizable form of deciduosis, as likely shown
in an example
[24]
. Still, in this case, expulsed fragments of the decidua are a suitable explanation too.
Previous studies noted that performing a biopsy of the cervix during pregnancy is generally safe in terms of
the occurrence of significant bleeding or pregnancy complications
[40-42]
. We obtained similar findings
based on 27 electively performed procedures before 24WG (44%), during 24-to-33 6/7WG (26%), and after
34WG (30%). Our analysis also reflects the relative safety of biopsy decidual lesions that might be more
prone to hemorrhages due to their friability, frequent association with chronic inflammation, and
susceptibility to necrosis
[24]
, especially with pregnancy progression
[8]
. For instance, the included studies
reported severe antepartum hemorrhage
[20,27,28]
, profuse bleeding provoked by gynecologic evaluation
[21]
, and biopsy-induced uncontrolled bleeding
[18]
in women between 24-41 WG. These lead to two
Conclusions
(1) a cervical biopsy or stiff brush procedure is needed if there are any doubts regarding cervical
cancer
[11]
, and (2) respiratory distress prophylaxis may be considered if the procedure is planned after
24WG. Lately, remote studies have indicated that misleading results might lead to unnecessary procedures
such as cervical conization during pregnancy
[39]
, postpartum hysterectomy, and cold knife conization
[23]
.
The authors cite that cervical and/or vaginal deciduosis does not require special pregnancy management
unless complications develop. However, there are a few considerations. First, a retrospective cohort study of
550 pregnant women with cervical polyps noted that 45.45% of cases accounted for decidualized ones, which
led to a greater frequency of pregnancy complications than non-decidualized polyps (28.1% vs. 6.1%)
[43]
.
Thus, managing decidualized polyps in certain circumstances can be distinct from those without changes.
Second, decidual polyp or polypoid mass ectomies might be helpful in resolving recurrent symptoms,
though it is uncertain who might benefit from the procedure and whether resection reduces the risk of
pregnancy complications. Perhaps pregnant women over 11WG with a polyp width greater than 11 mm,
recurrent vaginal bleeding (in our opinion, recurrent inflammatory discharges in the setting of either
multicolored or fragile lesions), and visualized roots could be good candidates
[25,44-46]
. At the same time,
one study noted that spontaneous regression of the lesions, which is common, did not reduce the risk of
cervical insufficiency and pregnancy loss
[13]
. Again, the authors did not evaluate these outcomes based on
the histological type of the polyps. Lastly, one case report showed a 6-to-2 cm polyp size reduction in two
months on local treatment with Neosporin
[23]
. Although a natural regression process can explain it, similar
options could be considered when the risk of symptomatic lesion removal is high (e.g., non-visualized roots)
and infected and edematous lesions are suspected.
In labor, macroscopic polypoid lesions, especially large ones (e.g., covering the entire posterior lip or an 8-
cm mass), are inflamed, and those that are initially revealed in the peripartum period concern providers
regarding intrapartum bleeding and its differential diagnosis
[15,16]
. However, at least six old studies with
the size of lesions between 1.5 and large cm were not complicated by significant intrapartum hemorrhage. In
one report, the 2-cm polypoid lesion remained "silent" even in the early postpartum period until biopsy
[21]
.
Finally, accelerated regression of cervical deciduosis is to be expected shortly after delivery and complete
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
10
of
13
lesion resolution by six weeks after delivery. According to our analysis, some residual findings are possible.
Limitations
Our systematic review has a few limitations. There is a risk of publication bias associated with reporting only
recognized and successfully managed cases. Of note, older studies reported mismanagement issues more
openly. Although improved antenatal management and advanced diagnostic opportunities might explain it,
the rarity of macroscopic lesions, the lesions' ability to appear at a later term of gestation, and uncertainty
in managing some situations perplex providers
[16,18]
. We analyzed only studies published in English, which
could lead to losing important information. Besides, some studies mainly described cases around the episode
of active management, missing the information essential for a thorough evaluation and, consequently,
limiting current knowledge on the diagnostic pitfalls that can be addressed in prospective case reports. We
also recovered or clarified some missed and descriptive data (discussed in the Materials and Methods
section) that unlikely impacted our results significantly. Of course, considering the rarity of the condition,
we could include only studies with a lower grade of evidence. However, we covered an important segment
useful for providers and prospective studies.
Conclusions
We described the clinical course, all pregnancy complications, and management-associated outcomes in
pregnant women with macroscopic cervical and/or vaginal deciduosis. Most frequently, it presented as
recurrent vaginal bleeding episodes that can be substantial after 24WG, requiring the exclusion of placenta
previa, cervical pregnancy, and malignancy, as well as consideration of respiratory distress syndrome
prophylaxis (for instance, in cases of large lesions, planned procedures, and successfully treated
hemorrhagic episodes). Pregnancy complications included significant antenatal hemorrhages, PROM,
uncontrolled bleeding-associated late abortion or preterm birth, and operative delivery. Performing cervical
cancer screening before 20WG, recognizing different forms of deciduosis, and confusing the friability of the
lesions can minimize the risks related to performing a biopsy, which seems avoidable in most situations.
However, a biopsy is necessary if there is any doubt regarding cancer (or guideline requirements), and it
seems safe to biopsy decidualized lesions, especially before 24WG. Conservative management of the cases is
commonly accepted, while the benefits and indications of the excision of the lesion require further
evaluation. There are no reports of associated significant intrapartum hemorrhages in women with polypoid
ectopies over 1.5 cm, which is a safe delivery route, although it might be individualized in some settings.
This review can serve as a standardized guideline for reporting all pertinent information in future case
reports, filling the knowledge gap on diagnostic and management challenges in the context of current
technological advancements and prenatal care standards. It can also be a quick source of information in the
search for similar cases. There is a need to report cases of management concerning decidualized lesions in
labor, regardless of their successful and complicated resolution. An interesting direction is investigating the
debatable problem of managing cervical polyps in the presence or absence of decidualized changes.
Additional Information
Disclosures
Conflicts of interest:
In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the
following:
Payment/services info:
All authors have declared that no financial support was received from
any organization for the submitted work.
Financial relationships:
All authors have declared that they have
no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might
have an interest in the submitted work.
Other relationships:
All authors have declared that there are no
other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
References
1
.
Kim HJ, Kim MJ, Song JY, Kim MR, Kim YT:
The prevalence of deciduosis in fertile women during cesarean
delivery
. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2008, 15(6):S100.
10.1016/j.jmig.2008.09.593
2
.
Ma L, Bian ML, Liu J, Wang XH, Pang CH, Chen Y:
Pregnancy related cervical cytological changes and clinical
management
. Chin J Obstet Gynecol. 2011, 46:84-87.
3
.
Schneider V, Barnes LA:
Ectopic decidual reaction of the uterine cervix: frequency and cytologic
presentation
. Acta Cytol. 1981, 25:616-22.
4
.
Laverty CR, Fortune DW, Davoren R, Butterfield LJ, Hollyock VE:
Stromal decidual change in the pregnant
cervix: colposcopic, cytological and histological considerations
. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1974,
14(3):162-6.
10.1111/j.1479-828x.1974.tb00835.x
5
.
Masouridou S, Mamopoulos A, Mavromatidis G, Karagiannis V:
Endometriosis and perinatal outcome - a
systematic review of the literature
. Curr Womens Health Rev. 2012, 8:121-30.
10.2174/157340412800194858
6
.
Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Ferrero S, Mangili G, et al.:
A systematic review on endometriosis during
pregnancy: diagnosis, misdiagnosis, complications and outcomes
. Hum Reprod Update. 2016, 22:70-103.
10.1093/humupd/dmv045
7
.
Lier MC, Malik RF, Ket JC, Lambalk CB, Brosens IA, Mijatovic V:
Spontaneous hemoperitoneum in
pregnancy (SHiP) and endometriosis - a systematic review of the recent literature
. Eur J Obstet Gynecol
Reprod Biol. 2017, 219:57-65.
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.10.012
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
11
of
13
8
.
Basta A:
Decidual ectopy of the uterine cervix
. The Cervix. Jordan J, Singer A, Jones H, Shafi M (ed):
Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK; 2006. 122-7.
9
.
Pisharodi LR, Jovanoska S:
Spectrum of cytologic changes in pregnancy. A review of 100 abnormal
cervicovaginal smears, with emphasis on diagnostic pitfalls
. Acta Cytol. 1995, 39:905-8.
10
.
Michael CW, Esfahani FM:
Pregnancy-related changes: a retrospective review of 278 cervical smears
. Diagn
Cytopathol. 1997, 17:99-107.
10.1002/(sici)1097-0339(199708)17:23.0.co;2-j
11
.
Hunter MI, Monk BJ, Tewari KS:
Cervical neoplasia in pregnancy. Part 1: screening and management of
preinvasive disease
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008, 199:3-9.
10.1016/j.ajog.2008.04.010
12
.
Nikolov A, Negentsov N, Ma
ĭ
nkhard K, Mekhandzhiev Ts:
Course of pregnancy and delivery in cases with
cervical deciduosis (Article in Bulgarian)
. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2007, 46:3-7.
13
.
Hirayama E, Ebina Y, Kato K, Akabane-Nakagawa K, Okuyama K:
Cervical polyps in early pregnancy are a
risk factor for late abortion and spontaneous preterm birth: A retrospective cohort study
. Int J Gynaecol
Obstet. 2022, 156:64-70.
10.1002/ijgo.13608
14
.
McGee WB, Slate TA:
Decidual reaction of the cervix—a review of 27 cases
. Calif Med. 1955, 82:306-8.
15
.
Gornall AS, Naftalin NJ, Brown LJ, Konje JC:
Massive necrosis of cervical ectopic decidua presenting in
labour
. BJOG. 2000, 107:573-5.
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb13283.x
16
.
Buttery J, Harry A, Kapoor S:
Intrapartum hemorrhage secondary to circumferential ectopic cervical
deciduosis: a case report
. Case Rep Womens Health. 2021, 31:e00328.
10.1016/j.crwh.2021.e00328
17
.
Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, et al.:
PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and
exemplars for reporting systematic reviews
. BMJ. 2021, 372:n160.
10.1136/bmj.n160
18
.
Verma ML, Sankhwar PL, Qayoom S, Gaur R:
Rare presentation of cervical deciduosis as antepartum
haemorrhage
. BMJ Case Rep. 2022, 15:e245569.
10.1136/bcr-2021-245569
19
.
van Diepen DA, Hellebrekers B, van Haaften AM, Natté R:
Cervical deciduosis imitating dysplasia
. BMJ Case
Rep. 2015, 2015:bcr2015210030.
10.1136/bcr-2015-210030
20
.
Oh JW, Lee EJ, Jin YM:
Vaginal hemorrhage associated with decidualized rectovaginal deep infiltrating
endometriosis during the third trimester of pregnancy: a case report
. J Korean Soc Radiol. 2022, 83:1121-7.
10.3348/jksr.2022.0026
21
.
Klein J, Domeier LH:
An unusual decidual reaction in the cervix
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1946, 51:423-6.
10.1016/s0002-9378(16)40023-2
22
.
Lapan B:
Deciduosis of the cervix and vagina simulating carcinoma
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1949, 58:743-7.
10.1016/s0002-9378(16)39230-4
23
.
Armenia CS, Shaver DN, Modisher MW:
Decidual transformation of the cervical stroma simulating
reticulum cell sarcoma
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1964, 89:808-16.
10.1016/0002-9378(64)90186-3
24
.
Spivack M:
Shedding of decidua during uterine pregnancy and its clinical significance
. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1949, 57:989-95.
10.1016/0002-9378(49)90659-6
25
.
Batkoska M, Korošec S, Frangež HB:
A rare case of symptomatic recurrent decidual polyp in each pregnancy
in a woman with primary infertility
. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2022, 49:191.
10.31083/j.ceog4909191
26
.
Xiaoyin W, Qingping Z, Mei Y, HongYing Y:
Diagnosis and treatment of cervical ectopic decidua during
pregnancy
. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2018, 45:428-32.
10.12891/ceog4264.2018
27
.
Mangla M, Nautiyal R, Shirazi N, Pati B:
Ectopic cervical deciduosis: a rare cause of antepartum hemorrhage
in mid trimester
. Eurasian J Med. 2021, 53:152-4.
10.5152/eurasianjmed.2021.20163
28
.
Oladipo A, Mathew J:
Cervicitis decidualis: a rare cause of antepartum hemorrhage
. J Low Genit Tract Dis.
2005, 9:52-4.
10.1097/00128360-200501000-00010
29
.
Orr CJ, Pedlow PR:
Deciduosis of the cervix manifesting as antepartum hemorrhage and simulating
carcinoma
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961, 82:884-6.
10.1016/s0002-9378(16)36160-9
30
.
Mathie JG:
Vaginal deciduosis simulating carcinoma
. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Emp. 1957, 64:720-1.
10.1111/j.1471-0528.1957.tb08463.x
31
.
Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, Moher D, Sox H, Riley D:
The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical
case reporting guideline development
. Glob Adv Health Med. 2013, 2:38-43.
10.7453/gahmj.2013.008
32
.
Munn Z, Barker TH, Moola S, et al.:
Methodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI
critical appraisal tool
. JBI Evid Synth. 2020, 18:2127-33.
10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00099
33
.
Richard F, Canlorbe G, Bazot M, Daraï E:
Management of pregnancy in woman with suspected malignant
deep infiltrating endometriosis fistulised to the uterine cervix
. BMJ Case Rep. 2014, 2014:bcr2014204978.
10.1136/bcr-2014-204978
34
.
Massi D, Susini T, Paglierani M, Salvadori A, Giannini A:
Pregnancy-associated ectopic decidua
. Acta Obstet
Gynecol Scand. 1995, 74:568-71.
10.3109/00016349509024392
35
.
Pafumi C, Pulvirenti G, Leanza V, Leanza G, Iemmola A, D’Agati A:
Severe dysplasia and spontaneous uterus
rupture in labour
. J Clin Res Bioeth. 2011, 2:119.
10.4172/2155-9627.1000119
36
.
Exacoustos C, Lauriola I, Lazzeri L, De Felice G, Zupi E:
Complications during pregnancy and delivery in
women with untreated rectovaginal deep infiltrating endometriosis
. Fertil Steril. 2016, 106:1129-1135.e1.
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.06.024
37
.
Kraemer B, Abele H, Hahn M, Wallwiener D, Rajab TK, Hornung R:
Cervical ectopic pregnancy on the portio:
conservative case management and clinical review
. Fertil Steril. 2008, 90:2011.e1-4.
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.06.018
38
.
Hilbert GH, Coleman FC:
Decidual polyps of the cervix
. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1951, 61:919-22.
10.1016/0002-9378(51)90356-0
39
.
Chapman GW, Savage EW, Salem FA:
Cervical deciduosis and intraepithelial neoplasia
. J Natl Med Assoc.
1979, 71:787-9.
40
.
Economos K, Perez Veridiano N, Delke I, Collado ML, Tancer ML:
Abnormal cervical cytology in pregnancy:
a 17-year experience
. Obstet Gynecol. 1993, 81:915-8.
41
.
Basta A, Szczudrawa A, Pityński K, Kolawa W:
The value of colposcopy and computerised colposcopy in
diagnosis and therapeutic management of CIN and early invasive cervical cancer in pregnant women
(Article in Polish)
. Ginekol Pol. 2002, 73:307-13.
42
.
Baldauf JJ, Dreyfus M, Gao J, Ritter J, Philippe E:
Management of pregnant women with abnormal cervical
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
12
of
13
smears. A series of 146 patients (Article in French)
. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 1996, 25:582-7.
43
.
Zou J, He Y, Chen H, Wang P, Xiao X, Liu S:
A clinicopathologic analysis of decidual polyps: a potentially
problematic diagnosis
. Int J Clin Pract. 2022, 2022:2200790.
10.1155/2022/2200790
44
.
Fukuta K, Yoneda S, Yoneda N, et al.:
Risk factors for spontaneous miscarriage above 12
weeks or premature
delivery in patients undergoing cervical polypectomy during pregnancy
. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020,
20:27.
10.1186/s12884-019-2710-z
45
.
Dadkhah F, Kashanian M, Eliasi G:
A comparison between the pregnancy outcome in women both with or
without threatened abortion
. Early Hum Dev. 2010, 86:193-6.
10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2010.02.005
46
.
Takahashi Y, Iwagaki S, Itoh M, et al.:
Cohort study of the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth and
septic abortion referred by pathological examination in Gifu prefecture in Japan
. Early Hum Dev. 2017,
104:33-7.
10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2016.11.007
2023 Bolgarina et al. Cureus 15(8): e44479. DOI 10.7759/cureus.44479
13
of
13
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.