Background
Endometriosis is defined as functional endometrial tissue located
outside of the uterine cavity (ectopic), often involving other structures
within the rest of the genital tract or pelvic peritoneum. 1 The
condition primarily affects up to 10% of reproductive age women. 1
Several theories have been proposed to explain the pathophysiology
of endometriosis; most common ones being retrograde menstrual
endometrial implantation or peritoneal lining metaplasia. The
symptoms typically experienced by patients with endometriosis
stem from endometriotic tissue involving specific structures. Typical
symptoms of endometriosis include dysmenorrhea, non-cyclic
dyspareunia, irregular or heavy menstrual bleeding, dyschezia, and
infertility.
Endometriotic involvement of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract may
cause a spectrum of symptoms, ranging from simple to complex. 2
However, a third of patients may be asymptomatic; and diagnosed
incidentally.3 Endometriosis is a clinical diagnosis of exclusion,
and diagnosis of endometriosis is established through laparoscopic
procedures retrieving tissue biopsy. 3 A definitive diagnosis of
endometriosis can only be made by histological evaluation of lesions
removed during surgery.4 Neither Serum markers nor imaging studies
are diagnostic – rather only support the diagnosis of endometriosis. 4
The histologic appearance consists of endometrial glands and
stroma with varying amounts of inflammation and fibrosis – unique
to endometriosis. 4 Histological evaluation is crucial because visual
appearance of the lesions during laparoscopy is variable - studies have
reported a marked discrepancy between the visual appearance and the
histology.4 Robotic-assisted (RA) - laparoscopic surgery, has shown
promising results with regards to pain relief, laparotomy conversions
or complication when treating stage IV endometriosis.5
The most common sites for endometriotic involvement are the
ovaries (54.9%), posterior broad ligament (35.2%), anterior cul-de-
sac (34.6%), posterior cul-de-sac (34.0%) and uterosacral ligament. 3
Occasionally, endometriotic tissue may be detected within the GI
tract, or very rarely, the respiratory tract. 3 Although endometriotic
involvement of the appendix is rare (0.8%), it can present with
variety of symptoms, or be asymptomatic. 2,6 Even rarer are severe
symptoms of underlying appendiceal endometriosis presenting as
acute appendicitis or acute abdomen. 7–9 Laparoscopic appendectomy
is the gold standard treatment for endometrial appendiceal because it
allows for thorough surgical exploration of the abdomen, especially in
patients with recurrent or unexplained pelvic pain.2,6,10
Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) is a new technique,
gaining popularity for its versatile use in various surgical procedures.
Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2018;9(4):276‒279. 276
© 2018 Rezai et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.
Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal
endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis:
a case report and review of literature
Volume 9 Issue 4 - 2018
Shadi Rezai,1,5 Neil D Patel BS,2 Alexander
C Hughes,2 Ninad M Patil,3 Elise Bardawil,5
Cassandra E Henderson,4 Xiaoming Guan5
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Southern California
Kaiser Permanente, USA
2St. George’s University, School of Medicine, St. George’s,
Grenada
3Department of Pathology & Immunology, Baylor College of
Medicine, USA
4Maternal and Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and
Gynecology, Lincoln Medical and Mental Health Center, USA
5Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery,
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of
Medicine, USA
Correspondence: Xiaoming Guan MD PhD, Section Chief and
Fellowship Director, Division of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic
Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor
College of Medicine, 6651 Main Street, 10th Floor, Houston,
T exas, 77030, USA, T el (832) 826-7464, Fax (832) 825-9349,
Email
[email protected]
Received: June 01, 2017 | Published: August 01, 2018
Abstract
Background : Endometriosis is defined as functional endometrial tissue located
outside of the uterine cavity. Typical symptoms include dysmenorrhea, non-cyclic
dyspareunia, irregular or heavy menstrual bleeding, dyschezia, and infertility.
Previously, Robotic Assisted (RA)-laparoscopic surgery was the procedure of choice
when treating stage IV endometriosis. Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) is
a new technique, gaining popularity for its versatile use in various surgical procedures.
We present a case report of a patient with stage IV appendiceal endometriosis managed
with Da Vinci RA-SILS appendectomy and a literature review.
Case: The patient was a 34-year-old female Gravida 0, Para 0 with a chief complaint
of dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain and cramping. She reported a history of
infertility for 18 months. The patient was diagnosed with a right pelvic sidewall
nodule with endometriosis, left round ligament endometriosis, left anterior broad
ligament endometriosis, posterior cul-de-sac endometriosis, with bladder, uterine, and
appendiceal endometriosis. The patient underwent hysteroscopy, chromotubation, and
Da Vinci RA-SILS resection of appendiceal endometriosis.
Conclusion
Although rare, endometriotic involvement of appendix can be a
symptomatic complication of gastrointestinal involvement and may present as acute
appendicitis or even nonspecific abdominal pain, requiring appendectomy. With
modern advancements, it is now preferred to perform Da Vinci RA-SILS appendectomy
in the setting of endometriosis for both surgical and cosmetic reasons.
Keywords
appendiceal endometriosis, appendix, chromotubation, da vinci
SILS appendectomy, da vinci SILS resection of endometriosis, deep-infiltrating
endometriosis, dyschezia, dysmenorrhea, endometriosis, endometriosis of appendix,
invasive endometriosis, laparoscopy, single-site robotic excision of endometriosis,
stage IV endometriosis
Obstetrics & Gynecology International Journal
Case Report
Open Access
Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature
277
Copyright:
©2018 Rezai et al.
Citation: Rezai S, Neil DPBS, Alexander CH, et al. Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature. Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2018;9(4):276‒279. DOI: 10.15406/ogij.2018.09.00347
Current applications for the procedure include, but are not limited
to: tubal ligation, hysterectomy, appendectomy, cholecystectomy,
gastrectomy, colectomy, and nephrectomy.11 The procedure is gaining
traction because of reduced post-operative pain or complications,
and cosmetic advantages.11 We present a case report of a patient with
stage IV appendiceal endometriosis managed with Da Vinci RA-SILS
appendectomy and a literature review.
Presentation of the case
The patient was a 34-year-old female, Gravida 0 Para 0, with a
chief complaint of dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain and cramping,
with Mittelschmerz, since menarche at age 13. Her pain was
unresponsive to medications and worsening over the past year. She
reported regular menses every 24-26 days. In addition, the patient also
reported new-onset dyschezia and dysuria with urinary frequency and
urgency. The patient denied dyspareunia however reported post-coital
bleeding. She reported a history of infertility and had been trying to
conceive for the past 18 months. She did not report any history of
hospitalization or surgery.
Physical exam revealed vital signs within normal limits, and
BMI of 23.35 kg/m 2. Positive findings included pain on palpation
of a bladder nodule and a left vaginal fornix nodule. There were no
palpable adnexal masses; rectal exam was within normal limits. A
hysterosalpingogram (HSG) one year prior had shown bilateral tubal
patency and no uterine filling defects. Her most recent transvaginal
ultrasound showed adenomyosis. Pelvic MRI showed a 3.8 cm
complex, septated, low signal intensity, non-enhancing lesion arising
from the left adnexa, possibly representing an endometrioma. There
are epithelial changes along the bladder and uterosacral ligaments
with no evidence of endometriosis (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Pelvic MRI showed a 3.8 cm complex septated low signal intensity
non-enhancing lesion arising from the left adnexa, possible representing and
endometrioma. There are epithelial changes along the bladder and uterosacral
ligaments with no evidence of endometriosis.
The patient underwent hysteroscopy, chromotubation, and Da Vinci
RA-SILS resection of endometriosis. During surgery, patient was
noted to have stage IV endometriosis with appendiceal involvement
(Figure 2A & 2B). This was managed surgically by general surgery
using Da Vinci RA-SILS appendectomy (Figure 2C). In addition,
cystoscopy, and ureteral stent placement and removal were performed
by Urology. Intraoperative findings and pathologic specimen
evaluation confirmed the diagnosis of right pelvic side wall nodule
with endometriosis, left round ligament endometriosis, left anterior
broad ligament endometriosis, posterior cul-de-sac endometriosis,
with bladder, uterine, and appendix endometriosis.
SILS technique (gynecology/urology)
Initially, a 15 mm port access incision was made at the umbilicus
entering the peritoneum and docking the robot. Using the monopolar
hook and blunt dissection, the left ovary and fallopian tube were freed
from the left pelvic sidewall, and a portion of the posterior cul-de-sac
peritoneum was removed. Subsequently, endometriosis and nodules
involving right and left pelvic sidewall, left round ligament, anterior
broad ligament, and anterior uterus were carefully removed. The
Urology team carefully dissected off the bladder from the anterior
uterine endometriosis nodule. Hemostasis was achieved with the
bipolar. The pelvis and abdomen were inspected, and hemostasis was
noted throughout. Chromotubation was performed with immediate
spill of dye from the right fallopian tube and delayed spill of dye from
the left fallopian tube. An Interceed absorbable adhesion barrier was
placed over the area of dissection along the left pelvic sidewall and the
anterior surface of the uterus and bladder.
Figure 2 Intraoperative Images: 2A: Multiple endometriotic implants on the
bowel; 2B: Appendix/Bowel; 2C: The appendix stapled off with a tan reload
stapler and the mesentery with a gray reload stapler.
RA-SILS appendectomy technique
RA-SILS access was established via the 15 mm umbilical incision.
The appendix was visualized with endometriosis affecting primarily
the retroperitoneal tip. The affected area was incised laterally to
mobilize the cecum, and the appendix was dissected out until the base
was identified. At this point the 12 mm port was inserted on the left
side and the appendix was stapled off with a tan reload stapler and
the mesentery with a grey reload stapler. The appendix, including the
surrounding peritoneum with endometriosis was excised, placed in
a bag, and removed via the single site port site. Multiple specimens
were collected and sent to pathology. Pathologic examination
confirmed the presence of endometriosis in the right pelvic side wall
nodule, left round ligament, left anterior broad ligament, bladder and
uterine serosa, and outer appendiceal wall (Figure 3). At postoperative
3-week follow-up, the patient reported normal bowel movements and
only mild left pelvic pain.
Figure 3 Pathology Images: 3A: At low power, endometriosis (encircled) is
noted in the outer appendiceal muscularis (H&E); 3B: On higher power, an
endometrial-type gland (black arrow) surrounded by endometrial-type stroma
(white arrow) is seen within smooth muscle (H&E).
Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature
278
Copyright:
©2018 Rezai et al.
Citation: Rezai S, Neil DPBS, Alexander CH, et al. Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature. Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2018;9(4):276‒279. DOI: 10.15406/ogij.2018.09.00347
Discussions
The signs and symptoms of endometriosis can be nonspecific,
or it may even be asymptomatic. However, endometriosis remains
a leading cause of chronic pelvic pain in reproductive age women.
Although rare, endometriosis can involve the appendix causing pain
and distress; or be found incidentally. Similar to acute appendicitis,
the laparoscopic surgical approach is considered to be the gold
standard. As cosmetic outcomes have become more important in
surgery, minimally invasive or SILS procedures are being used more
often. Taking a traditional approach and adding a modern twist, SILS
appendectomy is now an acceptable procedure to surgically treat
symptomatic and asymptomatic appendix-focused conditions. The
main benefits come from ease of access within the abdominal cavity,
with gentle tissue handling and manipulation. In addition, SILS
allows for proper tissue dissection and the use of the Endoloop as an
alternative to the larger trocar for stapler use.12
Prior to SILS, Double-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (DILA)
was introduced as a means of further minimizing the invasiveness
of traditional laparoscopic surgery, by decreasing then number of
incisions.13 A randomized control trial has demonstrated that DILA
can be performed with equivalent operative outcomes with superior
cosmetic outcomes. 13 Successful operations using DILA urged the
push for SILS, as stated previously, primarily for cosmetic reasons. 11
In direct comparison to traditional laparoscopic appendectomy, SILS
appendectomy can be conducted with comparable operative times,
lengths of stay, and procedural complications, and with superior
cosmetic outcomes – the main downside noted being the cost. 14,15 As
reported in this case, the use of SILS can be easily manipulated using
conventional laparoscopic instruments. A previous study outlined
SILS appendectomy utilizing three trocars (two 10mm and one 5mm),
using conventional and optical laparoscopic tweezers (10 mm, 30˚);
while using titanium LT 400 clips to ligate the base and pedicle of the
appendix.11
As described earlier, the SILS procedure can be applied to
appendectomy in female patients suffering from endometriosis. A
previous study performed to evaluate deeply located endometriosis
showed significant involvement of the appendix. Out of the patients
evaluated, nearly 50% have deep involvement by endometriosis,
while 32% showed appendiceal involvement. 16 Although these
patients were asymptomatic, the level of infiltration was indicative
for surgical intervention. 16 It has been suggested that prophylactic
concurrent appendectomy be performed as part of complete
endometriosis excision.16 Unusually, other intra-abdominal pathology
can be mimicked by pain from appendiceal endometriosis.17 Isolated,
deeply located appendiceal involvement may be missed by diagnostic
laparoscopy; and can present with no external diagnostic features,
therefore routine appendectomy has also been advocated in women
with recurrent abdominal pain.17–20
Conclusion
In the majority of patients, endometriosis presents very classically
– dysmenorrhea, non-cyclic dyspareunia, irregular or heavy menstrual
bleeding, dyschezia, and infertility. Rare presentations can be due to
endometriotic involvement of the gastrointestinal tract, presenting
an array of symptoms, but may also be asymptomatic. Although
rare, endometriotic involvement of appendix can be a symptomatic
complication of gastrointestinal involvement and may present as
acute appendicitis or even nonspecific abdominal pain, requiring
appendectomy. Traditionally, both endometriosis and appendicitis
have been evaluated and treated laparoscopically. It has been
proposed, that indicated endometrial appendix removal be performed
by appropriately trained gynecologists.21 With modern advancements,
it is now preferable to perform Da Vinci RA-SILS appendectomy in
the setting of endometriosis for both surgical and cosmetic reasons.
Acknowledgments
Dr. Xiaoming Guan is a speaker for Applied Medical, Rancho
Santa Margarita, and California.
Conflicts of interest
Authors did not report any potential conflicts of interests.
References
1. Murphy SJ, Kaur A, Wullschleger ME. Endometrial decidualization:
a rare cause of acute appendicitis during pregnancy. J Surg Case Rep .
2016;2016(4).
2. Yoon J, Lee YS, Chang HS, et al. Endometriosis of the appendix. Ann Surg
Treat Res. 2014;87(3):144–7.
3. Saleem A, Navarro P, Munson JL, et al. Endometriosis of the appendix:
Report of three cases. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2011;2(2):16–9.
4. ACOG Practice bulletin no. 114: management of endometriosis. Obstet
Gynecol. 2010;116(1):223–36.
5. Brudie LA, Gaia G, Ahmad S, et al. Peri-operative outcomes of patients
with stage IV endometriosis undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic
surgery. J Robot Surg. 2012 Dec;6(4):317–22.
6. Paramythiotis D, Stavrou G, Panidis S, et al. Concurrent appendiceal and
umbilical endometriosis: a case report and review of the literature. J Med
Case Rep. 2014;8:258.
7. Ben Maamer A, Zaafouri H, Haoues N, et al. Laparoscopic appendectomy
for appendiceal endometriosis presenting as acute appendicitis. Tunis Med.
2013;91(5):369–70.
8. Emre A, Akbulut S, Yilmaz M, et al. An unusual cause of acute appendicitis:
Appendiceal endometriosis. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2013;4(1):54–7.
9. Salati SA, Raza AA. Endometriosis: a rare cause of appendicitis. J Coll
Physicians Surg Pak. 2011;21(5):304–5.
10. Laskou S, Papavramidis TS, Cheva A, et al. Acute appendicitis caused by
endometriosis: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2011;5:144.
11. Pinheiro RN, Sousa RC, Castro FM, et al. Single-incision videolaparoscopic
appendectomy with conventional videolaparoscopy equipment. Arq Bras
Cir Dig. 2014;27(1):34–7.
12. Kliethermes C, Blazek K, Guan X. Single-Incision Robotic Appendectomy,
Video Posters – Endometriosis, Video Number 430. J Minim Invasive
Gynecol. 2016;23(7):S143.
13. Pattanshetti VM, Krishna KL. Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy
versus double-incision, three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: A 1-year
randomized controlled trial. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2018.
14. Buckley FP, Vassaur H, Monsivais S, et al. Single-incision laparoscopic
appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: an
analysis of outcomes at a single institution. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(2):626–
30.
15. Villalobos Mori R, Escoll Rufino J, Herrerías González F, et al. Prospective,
randomized comparative study between single-port laparoscopic
appendectomy and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. Cir Esp .
2014;92(7):472–7.
Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature
279
Copyright:
©2018 Rezai et al.
Citation: Rezai S, Neil DPBS, Alexander CH, et al. Da vinci SILS-appendectomy for appendiceal endometriosis secondary to stage IV endometriosis: a case
report and review of literature. Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2018;9(4):276‒279. DOI: 10.15406/ogij.2018.09.00347
16. Moulder JK, Siedhoff MT, Melvin KL, et al. Risk of appendiceal
endometriosis among women with deep-infiltrating endometriosis. Int J
Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;139(2):149–154.
17. Shen AY , Stanes A. Isolated Appendiceal Endometriosis. J Obstet Gynaecol
Can. 2016;38(10):979–981.
18. Fatehchehr S, Macik P, Sinervo K. Small Bowel Segmental Resection and
Reanastomosis with Appendectomy for Invasive Endometriosis. J Minim
Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(6S):S138–S139.
19. Ribeiro DM, Ribeiro GP, Santos TP, et al. Incidental Appendectomy in
the Surgical Treatment of Deep Endometriosis Infiltrating the Bowel:
Anatomo-pathological Findings in a Series of 109 Patients. J Minim
Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(6S):S30–S31.
20. Shavell VI, Mahdi HM, Awonuga AO, et al. Appendectomy in the
gynecological setting: intraoperative findings and corresponding
histopathology. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2011;71(3):189–92.
21. Jocko JA, Shenassa H, Singh SS. The role of appendectomy in gynecologic
surgery: a Canadian retrospective case series. J Obstet Gynaecol Can .
2013;35(1):44–8.
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.