Scar endometriosis

In: Applied Radiology · 2018 · pp. 45–46 · doi:10.37549/ar2541 · W4289311103
article OA: hybrid CC0
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash+body, 2026-10-06 ⓘ

This case report describes a patient with scar endometriosis following cesarean section, highlighting the importance of radiological imaging for accurate diagnosis due to the condition's varied clinical presentation and wide differential diagnoses.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-10-06 · read from full text ⓘ

This case report describes a 36-year-old female with cyclic abdominal pain and skin nodules at a previous cesarean section site, leading to the diagnosis of scar endometriosis via imaging and pathology. The authors highlight that while scar endometriosis is a rare complication occurring in less than 2% of cases, it presents with varied clinical symptoms including cyclical or non-cyclical pain and requires careful radiological assessment using CT, MRI, or ultrasound to distinguish it from other masses like hematomas or neoplasms. The paper emphasizes the lack of a single gold-standard diagnostic modality and notes that misdiagnosis is common due to the wide differential diagnosis associated with post-surgical scar tissue changes. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically the presentation and diagnosis of scar endometriosis following cesarean delivery.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Full text 5,813 characters · extracted from oa-html · 3 sections · click to expand

Discussion

Scar endometriosis is defined by the implantation or/and growth of endometrial tissue postsurgically at the incision site. These lesions are a product of gynecological or obstetrical surgery, including laparotomy and laparascopic approaches of abdominal and pelvic cases. Endometriosis typically presents as the embedding of endometrial tissue and glands in nonuterine locations such as the adnexa, cul de sac, GI organs and extremities. The incidence of scar endometriosis has been shown to be less than 2%,1,2 with the most common subtype being postcesarean section.3 Given the wide differential diagnosis and history of incorrect diagnoses, scar endometriosis should be evaluated for its clinical signs, with radiological assessment leading to its diagnosis. While our patient presented with cyclical pain, it should be noted that cyclical, noncyclical, continuous, and nonexistent pain patterns have been noted.4-6 The onset of pain can range from months to years.5 On physical exam, many patients show mobile and immobile nodular skin changes.6 In addition to clinical signs, radiological imaging is key to accurate diagnosis and exclusion. Studies show CT, MRI and ultrasound to be reasonable options for diagnosing scar endometriosis.3 One study discussed sonography’s advantages of visualizing fistulas, tracts and vascularity, rendering it more accurate than CT, MRI, and FNA biopsy/laparoscopy which, in chronic cases, has led to misdiagnosis.5 Another study showed MRI superior in detecting scar endometriosis.6 A recent case series study suggested that transabdominal sonoelastography may be beneficial in further delineating surfaces, leading to more precise margin removal preoperatively.7 While these results indicate there is no gold standard in initial assessment of suspected scar endometriosis, the advantages of each should be understood. The clinical picture and potential acute treatment needed for the differential diagnoses highlights the need to identify and comprehensively assess potential cases of scar endometriosis.

Conclusion

Given the varied and recurrent clinical presentation of scar endometriosis, it is important to take note of its wide-ranging forms. Its increasing clinical prevalence emphasizes the need to further evaluate the most beneficial diagnostic imagine modality to guide appropriate management.

References

- Danielpour P, Layke J, Durie N. Scar endometriosis, a rare cause for a painful scar: A case report and review of the literature. Can J Plast Surg. 2010;18((1)):19-20. - Mistrangelo M, Gilbo N, Cassoni P. Surgical scar endometriosis. Surgery Today. 2013;44((4)):767-772. doi:10.1007/s00595-012-0459-43.. - Gidwaney R, Badler R, Yam B. Endometriosis of abdominal and pelvic wall scars: Multimodality imaging findings, pathologic correlation, and radiologic mimics. RadioGraphics. 2012;32((7)):2031-2043. doi:10.1148/rg.327125024.. - Patel N. Scar endometriosis: A sequel of caesarean section. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8(4):135-140. doi:10.7860/jcdr/2014/7554.4267.. - Francica G. Reliable clinical and sonographic findings in the diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis near cesarean section scar. World J Radiol. 2012;4((4)):135-140. doi:10.4329/wjr.v4.i4.135.. - Ozel L, Sagiroglu J, Unal A. Abdominal wall endometriosis in the cesarean section surgical scar: A potential diagnostic pitfall. J. Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2012;38((3)):526-530. doi:10.1111/j.1447-0756.2011.01739.x.. - Fawzy M, Amer T. Efficacy of transabdominal sonoelastography in the diagnosis of caesarean section scar endometrioma: A pilot study. Journal of Obstet Gynaecol. 2015;35((8)):832-834. doi:10.3109/01443615.2015.1011107.. Citation Scar endometriosis. Applied Radiology. 2018;47(11):45-46. doi:10.37549/AR2541. .

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.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-html ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosis

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (7)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK