Abstract
Introduction: Endometriosis is the presence of
functioning endometrium (gland and stroma)
in sites other than uterine mucosa, usually in
the pelvis, causing dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia,
menstrual irregularities, and infertility. case
report: A 27-year-old, had caesarean section
11 months ago presented to Obstetrics and
Gynaecology clinic with cyclical bleeding
from her surgical scar from ten months. she
noted bleeding from the small nodule over
the healed pfannenstial scar on day of her
menses. Examination revealed a small reddish
nodule 0.5 cmx0.5 cm, non-tender, with two
blackish dots on it. transabdominal ultrasound
examination revealed that the nodule confined
at the subcutaneous tissue, above the rectus.
Ahmad Akram Omar 1, Mohd Shukri Othman 2, Pek Sung
Hoo3, Erinna Mohamad Zon 4, Ahmad Amir Ismail 1, Rahi-
mah Abdul Rahim 1, Nik Rafiza Afendi 1, Adibah Ibrahim 5
Affiliations: 1Senior lecturer, Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Department, School of Medical Science, University Sains
Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia;
2Professor, Ob-
stetrics and Gynaecology Department, School of Medical
Science, University Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan,
Malaysia;
3Clinical lecturer, Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Department, School of Medical Science, University Sains
Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia;
4Specialist
trainee, Obstetrics and Gynaecology Department, School
of Medical Science, University Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu,
Kelantan, Malaysia;
5Associate Professor, Obstetrics and
Gynaecology Department, School of Medical Science, Uni-
versity Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan.
Corresponding Author: Pek Sung Hoo, Clinical lecturer, Ob-
stetrics and Gynaecology Department, School of Medical
Science, University Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan,
Malaysia.
Received: 20 August 2017
Accepted: 26 December 2017
Published: 11 April 2018
Diagnosis of scar endometriosis was made. she
had wide local excision and recovered well.
the histological examination was consistent
with scar endometriosis. conclusion: scar
endometriosis is a very rare condition. Women
in the reproductive age with swelling, pain and
discharge at the scar following surgery should
be suspected for scar endometriosis.
Keywords
caesarean section, Endometriosis,
Pfannenstial scar, scar endometriosis
How to cite this article
Omar AA, Othman MS, Hoo PS, Zon EM, Ismail
AA, Rahim RA, Afendi NR. Menstruation from the
pfannenstial scar: A case of rare presentation of
atypical endometriosis. J Case Rep Images Obstet
Gynecol 2018;4:100036Z08AO2018.
Article ID: 100036Z08AO2018
*********
doi: 10.5348/100036Z08AO2018CR
Introduction
Endometriosis is the presence of functioning
endometrium (gland and stroma) in sites other
than uterine mucosa, usually in the pelvis, causing
dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, menstrual irregularities,
and infertility [1]. It is not a neoplastic condition, although
malignant transformation is possible. Endometriosis is
a disease of contrast. It is a benign but locally invasive,
disseminates widely. Cyclic hormones stimulate growth
but continuous hormones suppress it. Scar endometriosis
is rare with incidence of 0.3–1% [2]. It usually manifest
case report peer reviewed | opeN access
Journal of Case Reports and Images in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 4, 2018.
J Case Rep Images Obstet Gynecol 2018;4:100036Z08AO2018.
www.edoriumjournals.com/case-reports/jcrog
Omar et al. 2
as discrete mass near surgical or procedural scars such
as caesarean section, hysterectomy and episiotomy.
[3]. A palpable subcutaneous mass near surgical scars
associated with cyclic pain and swelling during menses
is the most frequent clinical presentation [4]. Some even
manifest as cyclical bleeding during menses. Hereby
we report a case of cyclical bleeding scar endometriosis
following caesarean section.
cAsE rEPOrt
A 27-year-old Malay lady, whose last child birth was
11 months ago presented to Obstetrics and Gynaecology
clinic with cyclical bleeding from her surgical scar for ten
months. She had emergency lower segment caesarean
section (EMLSCS) for poor progress of labour and the
surgery was uncomplicated. She regained her menses after
two months and noted bleeding from the small nodule on
day one menses. On subsequent months bleeding became
longer till day three menses. She denied dysmenorrhea,
dyspareunia, and intermenstrual bleeding. Examination
of the abdomen revealed a small reddish nodule 0.5cm
x0.5cm, non-tender, with two blackish dots on it, well
defined lesion and non-mobile (Figure 1).
Transabdominal ultrasound examination revealed
that the nodule was confined at the subcutaneous tissue,
above the rectus. Diagnosis of scar endometriosis was
made based on the clinical presentation and ultrasound
examination. Subsequently, the patient underwent
excision of scar endometriosis. The excision was made
around the mass with a margin of 1cm circumferential
and 2cm depth (Figure 2).
The histological finding was consistent with scar
endometriosis. Postoperative recovery was uneventful
and patient was discharged without medication. At three
months follow-up, the patient was asymptomatic.
Discussion
Endometriosis is the presence of functioning
endometrium (gland and stroma) in sites other
than uterine mucosa, usually in the pelvis, causing
dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, menstrual irregularities,
and infertility [1]. This is the first occurrence of scar
endometriosis at our center [4, 5]. Scar endometriosis
is rare with incidence of 0.3–1% [2]. It was postulated
to occur as the result of mechanical transplant of the
endometrium or placenta cell at the incision site during
the operation [4]. Endometrial cells in early stage of
wound healing might benefit with protective barrier and
nutrition source provided by clot formation. With the
effect of angiogenesis and stimulation of oestrogen, the
disease might progress further.
Careful history and physical examination are
important to diagnose the disease. Symptoms varies
such as cyclical change in swelling size, bleeding or
discharge from the scar and abdominal wall pain and is
always misdiagnosed as the incidence is extremely low,
and symptoms may be easily dismissed by the patient. In
one case, series of six cases by Poonam Goel at el, none
of the patient had symptoms of pelvic endometriosis [9].
The incidence of concomitant pelvic endometriosis with
scar endometriosis has been reported to be from 14.3%
to 26% [2]. Ideally, all patients should be examined
for concomitant pelvic endometriosis. When a proper
diagnosis cannot be achieved, scar endometriosis can
be easily mixed with other surgical conditions like
hematoma, neuroma, hernia, granuloma, abscess, scar
tissue, neoplastic tissue, or even metastatic carcinoma,
which is a simple excuse to refer the patient to the general
surgeon [8, 9]. Often, the diagnosis of endometriosis is not
suggested until after a biopsy and histology examination
has been performed. Correct preoperative diagnosis is
achieved in 20% to 50% of these patients [ 2, 3, 4].
Imaging procedures help, rather than confirm, in
obtaining a differential diagnosis. Ultrasonography is
the best and most commonly used investigation tool for
abdominal masses, given its practicality and lower cost.
Francica et al showed diagnostic USG features of scar
endometriosis as (i) a hypoechoic echoes, (ii) regular
margin, often speculated, infiltrating the adjacent
tissue and (iii) a hypoechoic ring of variable width and
continuity [6]. Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC)
Figure 1: Small nodule at the region of caesarean section scar.
Figure 2: Tissue removed after excision.
Journal of Case Reports and Images in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 4, 2018.
J Case Rep Images Obstet Gynecol 2018;4:100036Z08AO2018.
www.edoriumjournals.com/case-reports/jcrog
Omar et al. 3
was reported in some studies for confirming the diagnosis
However, FNAC is not a liable method to make the
diagnosis of scars, and surgeons must be aware of some
diagnosis such as inguinal hernia and re-implantation of
potential malignancies during process. Theoretically, this
procedure has the potential to seed the needle tract with
cell and cause recurrence, especially within concomitant
intra-pelvic endometriosis [3, 5, 6]. It might be benefit
in the cases of large masses, doubtful diagnosis, and
atypical clinical presentations.
Local wide excision, with at least a 1 cm margin, is an
accurate treatment choice of scar endometriosis and also
for recurrent lesions [2–4, 10, 11]. It is often misdiagnosed
entity and commonly occurs after caesarean delivery,
hysterostomy, hysterectomy and laparotomy [4, 5, 12].
Recurrence of scar endometriosis seldom happens
with only a few cases reported. As expected, the larger
and deeper lesions to the muscle or the fascia are more
difficult to excise completely. In large lesions, complete
excision of the lesion may entail a synthetic mesh
placement or tissue transfer for closure after resection
[2, 3, 11]. Medical therapy with danazol, progesterone,
and GnRH produces only partial recovery, and mostly
recurrence occurs after cessation of the treatment with
extreme side effects [7]. The cause of recurrence might be
incomplete initial incision or spreading of endometriosis
during manipulation.
Histology is the hallmark of diagnosis. It is confirmed
by presence of endometrial glands, stroma, and
hemosiderin pigment [1].
Numerous measures have been proposed to prevent
scar endometriosis. Wasfie et al suggested a method to
prevent such iatrogenic implants by careful cleaning and
vigorous irrigation of the abdominal wall wound with a
high-jet saline solution before closure [13].
Conclusion
In conclusion, scar endometriosis is a rare condition
but with significant quality of life disturbance. Therefore,
any women in the reproductive age presented with painful
swelling and discharge from the scar following obstetric
surgery, scar endometriosis should be suspected.
Wide local excision is the procedure of choice for both
diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.
References
1. Pauerstein CJ. Clinical presentation and diagnosis. In:
Schenken RS, editor. Endometriosis: Contemporary
Concepts in Clinical Management. Philadelphia, PA:
JB Lippincott; 1989. p. 127–44.
2. Bergqvist A. Different types of extragenital
endometriosis: A review. Gynecol Endocrinol 1993
Sep;7(3):207–21.
3. Steck WD, Helwig EB. Cutaneous endometriosis. Clin
Obstet Gynecol 1966 Jun;9(2):373–83.
4. Koger KE, Shatney CH, Hodge K, McClenathan JH.
Surgical scar endometrioma. Surg Gynecol Obstet
1993 Sep;177(3):243–6.
5. Patterson GK, Winburn GB. Abdominal wall
endometriomas: Report of eight cases. Am Surg 1999
Jan;65(1):36–9.
6. Francica G, Giardiello C, Angelone G, Cristiano
S, Finelli R, Tramontano G. Abdominal wall
endometriomas near cesarean delivery scars:
Sonographic and color doppler findings in a series of
12 patients. J Ultrasound Med 2003 Oct;22(10):1041–
7.
7. Rivlin ME, Das SK, Patel RB, Meeks GR. Leuprolide
acetate in the management of cesarean scar
endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol 1995 May;85(5 Pt
2):838–9.
8. Rani PR, Soundararaghavan S, Rajaram P.
Endometriosis in abdominal scars: Review of 27
cases. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1991 Nov;36(3):215–8.
9. Goel P, Devi L, Tandon R, Saha PK, Dalal A. Scar
endometriosis - a series of six patients. Int J Surg
2011;9(1):39–40.
10. Ding DC, Hsu S. Scar endometriosis at the site of
cesarean section. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2006
Sep;45(3):247–9.
11. Marsden NJ, Wilson-Jones N. Scar endometriosis: A
rare skin lesion presenting to the plastic surgeon. J
Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013 Apr;66(4):e111–3.
12. Uzunçakmak C, Güldaş A, Ozçam H, Dinç K. Scar
endometriosis: A case report of this uncommon entity
and review of the literature. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol
2013;2013:386783.
13. Wasfie T, Gomez E, Seon S, Zado B. Abdominal wall
endometrioma after cesarean section: A preventable
complication. Int Surg 2002 Jul–Sep;87(3):175–7.
*********
Author contributions
Ahmad Akram Omar – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the
article, Revising it critically for important intellectual
content, Final approval of the version to be published
Mohd Shukri Othman – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the
article, Final approval of the version to be published
Pek Sung Hoo – Substantial contributions to conception
and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the article,
Revising it critically for important intellectual content,
Final approval of the version to be published
Erinna Mohamad Zon – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of
data, Drafting the article, Final approval of the version to
be published
Ahmad Amir Ismail – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the
article, Revising it critically for important intellectual
content, Final approval of the version to be published
Rahimah Abdul Rahim – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the
article, Final approval of the version to be published
Journal of Case Reports and Images in Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 4, 2018.
J Case Rep Images Obstet Gynecol 2018;4:100036Z08AO2018.
www.edoriumjournals.com/case-reports/jcrog
Omar et al. 4
Nik Rafiza Afendi – Substantial contributions to
conception and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the
article, Final approval of the version to be published
Adibah Ibrahim – Substantial contributions to conception
and design, Acquisition of data, Drafting the article, Final
approval of the version to be published
Guarantor of submission
The corresponding author is the guarantor of submission.
source of support
None
consent statement
Written informed consent was obtained from the patient
for publication of this case report.
conflict of Interest
Authors declare no conflict of interest.
copyright
© 2018 Ahmad Akram Omar et al. This article is
distributed under the terms of Creative Commons
Attribution License which permits unrestricted use,
distribution and reproduction in any medium provided
the original author(s) and original publisher are properly
credited. Please see the copyright policy on the journal
website for more information.
Access full text article on
other devices
Access PDF of article on
other devices
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.