A case report of caesarean scar endometriosis

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of func - tioning endometrial cells outside the uterine cavity 1 which affects between 5 to 10% of women in repro - ductive age affects with peak incidence in the third and fourth decades 2 . Endometriosis can be divided into intrapelvical and, less common - extrapelvical. Scar endometriosis is a form of extrapelvical endometriosis and is on of the least frequent presentations 3. The incidence has been estimated to be 0.03% to 0.40% of all cases of endometriosis 4. We report a case of scar endometrio - sis in Pfannesteil scar in a 3 1 year old woman, who presented 6 years following an emergency Caesarean Section, complaining of tender and palpable lumps on her incision scar. She underwent laparotomy and excision of scar endometriotic nodules. Case presentation A 3 1 year old Caucasian woman, gravida 2 , para 2 , presented to our clinic complaining of lumps on her caesarean section scar. She had a spontaneous nor - mal delivery followed by an emergency Caesarean section, the latter being 6 years prior to presentation. Lumps were tender to touch and more protuberant when she was on a period. Her periods were regular and fairly painful and she had no urinary or bowel symptoms. Her past medical history was insignifi - cant, including pneumonia recently and asthma. Examination revealed soft abdomen, with four palpable discrete tender masses on the anterior ab - HJOG An Obstetrics and Gynecology International Journal VOLUME 17 ISSUE 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018 19 HJOG 2018, 17 (1), 19-21 Case report A case report of caesarean scar endom etriosis Tingi Efterpi Specialty registrar in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Furness General Hospital, Barrow in Furness, UK A bstract Although it is uncommon, extrapelvic endometriosis can form a discrete mass known as an abdominal wall endometrioma. The incidence of abdominal wall endometriomas has been estimated to be 0.03% to 0.15 % of all cases of endometriosis. We report a case of scar endometriosis in Pfannesteil scar in a 31 year old woman, who presented six years following an emergency Caesarean Section, complaining of some lumps on her inci - sion scar. The patient underwent laparotomy followed by the excision of five endometriotic nodules. Key words: caesarean scar, endometrioma Correspondence Dr. Efterpi Tingi, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Furness General Hospital, Dalton Lane, L1 4 4LF, Barrow in Furness, UK, E-mail:[email protected]. Tel:0044-7796025836, Fax:0044-1 229 871 047  Tingi.qxp_Layout 1 20/02/2018 00:31 Page 19 dominal wall; two on the right and two on the left and superior to her Caesarean section scar. The smallest nodule measured about 0.5 cm and the largest about 2 cm. Speculum, bimanual and pelvic examination were essentially normal apart from very mild tenderness in the Pouch of Douglas. Transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonogra - phy revealed a retroverted uterus measuring 8.2 cm, a rectovaginal nodule measuring 1.3 cm x 0.9cm and 6-7 nodules were seen in the anterior abdominal wall, with the largest on the left measuring 3 .0 x 1.5 cm. These had several cystic areas and features of abdominal wall endometriosis. The right ovary measured 15 cc with heterogenous area of 2 cm which may represent endometriotic deposits. The left ovary appeared normal measuring 8cc. Options had been discussed with patient and she opted for surgical excision. Laparotomy was per - formed followed by the excision of five endometriotic nodules. Both tubes and ovaries appeared normal. There were no adhesions or rectovaginal nodules, but small area of scarring in the Pouch of Douglas. Histopathology report confirmed the findings of scar endometriotic nodules. Macroscopic examina - tion of the specimen showed five irregular fragments of fibrofatty tissue the largest 3.5 cm in maximum ex - tent. The cut surfaces show irregular pale fibrosis with microcystic change containing mucinous fluid and larger cysts up to 0.6cm which contain black ge - latinous fluid. Microscopic examination showed pieces of fibrofatty with multifocal endometriosis and that the endometriotic foci were surrounded by fibroblastic and mature scar tissue and within the scar tissue were entrapped degenerating skeletal muscle fibres. The patient presented eight months following her procedure with a further nodule at the right angle of the scar. On examination, it was in the area where the largest endometriotic nodule had been excised. This time patient opted for conservative approach. D iscussion The presence of a mass of extra-pelvic endome - trial tissue within the abdominal wall (ie, endometri - oma) is uncommon and it occurs more frequently in women who had previous abdominal or pelvic sur - gery. Although in most cases occurring in patients with previous caesarean, endometriomas have also been observed in the surgical incisions following la - paroscopic hysterectomy. Differential diagnosis of palpable masses close to the surgical scar includes incisional hernia, hematoma, granuloma, lipomas, haematomas, sebaceous cysts, cheloid, suture gran - ulomas, abscess or various soft tissue tumours 4. There are different theories in the literature which support the mechanism of scar endometriosis devel - opment. These include the implantation or retro - grade menstruation theory, the coelomic metaplasia theory and that of direct implantation. The most popular theory is that of direct implantation; during the surgical procedure, endometrial tissue is seeded into the wound 5 . The most common symptoms of endometriosis include cyclical pain, subfertility, dysmenorrhea and dyspareunia. Quite often patients present with the combination of these problems. Caesarean scar en - dometriomas can cause periodic pain at the incision site at the time of menstruation, incision site can be tender to touch and hypertrophic 3.The diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis could be challenging if cyclical pain is not present. The time from CS to the onset of symptoms varies considerably and ranges from months to 17 .5 years, with an average of 3 0 months 4. The presumptive diagnosis should always be considered when signs and symptoms clearly co - incide with the phases of the menstrual period. Ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the abdomen and pelvis are important to define not only the size of the lesion, but also the degree of involvement of the abdominal wall. MRI’s sensitivity for the diagno - VOLUME 17 ISSUE 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018 Ververidou et al 20 Tingi.qxp_Layout 1 20/02/2018 00:31 Page 20 sis of abdominal wall endometriosis is reported up to 71% and its specificity as 82%; it has been sug- gested that MRI seems to be the best method in pre- operative diagnosis as it can be used to evaluate pelvic and extraperitoneal disease4-6. Fine-needle as- piration (FNA) cytology is generally inconclusive, al- though it may be of some value in planning surgical approach for the management of cases of scar en- dometriomas5. Finally, laparoscopy is the gold standard for eval- uating and diagnosing pelvic and peritoneal en- dometriotic implantations7 . Local excision if the treatment of choice of abdominal wall endometri- omas like in our case. It has been reported, that the likelihood of recurrence could be decreased by achieving clear margins of at least 1 cm8. Medical treatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues could be offered to patients who do not wish to undergo any surgical intervention for tran- sient relief of symptoms7,8.

Caesarean section greatly increases the risk of de- veloping scar endometriosis. In conclusion, scar en- dometriosis is a rare condition and should be suspected when a woman in the reproductive age presents with pain and swelling at scar site especially following obstetric surgery. Abdominal ultrasound and computed tomography or MRI of the abdomen and pelvis may help in the differential diagnosis. Conflict of interest The author declare no conflict of interest. Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained

1. Kaloo P, Reid G, Wong F. Caesarean section scar endometriosis: Two cases of recurrent disease and a literature review. Aust NZ J Obstet Gy- naecol 2002;42:218–20. 2. Danielpour PJ, Layke JC, Durie N, Glickman LT.Scar endometriosis - a rare cause for a painful scar: A case report and review of the literature. Can J Plast Surg 2010 Spring;18(1):19-20. 3. Francica G, Giardiello C, Angelone G, Cristiano S, Finelli R, Tramontano G. Abdominal wall en- dometriosis near cesarean delivery scars. J Ul- trasound Med 2003;22:1041–7. 4. Gupta P, Gupta S. Scar Endometriosis: a Case Report with Literature Review. Acta Med Iran 2015 Dec;53(12):793-5. 5. Efremidou EI, Kouklakis G, Mitrakas A, Lirat- zopoulos N, Polychronidis AC. Primary umbili- cal endometrioma: a rare case of spontaneous abdominal wall endometriosis. International Journal of General Medicine 2012;5:999-1002. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S37302. 6. Sinha R., Kumar M., Matah M. Abdominal Scar Endometriosis after Cesarean Section: A Rare Entity. AMJ 2011;4;1:60-62. 7. Nissotakis C, Zouros E, Revelos K, Sakorafas GH. Abdominal wall endometrioma: a case report and review of the literature. AORN J 2010 Jun;91(6):730-42 8. Zhao X, Lang J, Leng J, Liu Z, Sun D, Zhu L. Ab- dominalwall endometriomas. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;90(3):218-222. VOLUME 17 ISSUE 1, JANUARY-MARCH 2018 Effects of oral contraceptives to bone mineral density of young women 21 Received 2-12-2017 Revised 22-12-2017 Accepted 27-12-2017 Tingi.qxp_Layout 1 20/02/2018 00:31 Page 21