Radiologic Findings of Abdominal Wall Endometriosis

Jung Wook Seo
In: Journal of the Korean Radiological Society · 2003 · vol. 49(6) , pp. 489 · doi:10.3348/jkrs.2003.49.6.489 · W2327962740
OA: closed CC0
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-15 ⓘ

This retrospective review of seven surgically proven cases describes radiologic features of abdominal wall endometriosis, including well or poorly marginated solid masses with focal cystic areas located in subcutaneous fat or muscle.

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, 2026-09-08 · read from full text ⓘ

This study retrospectively evaluated the radiologic characteristics of abdominal wall endometriosis in seven patients with surgically proven disease. The researchers analyzed ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging findings to assess mass size, location, margins, and contrast enhancement patterns. Results indicated that lesions typically presented as well or poorly marginated solid masses within the subcutaneous fat or rectus abdominis muscle, often accompanied by focal cystic areas. While these imaging features were not entirely specific, the presence of a solid abdominal mass in reproductive-age women with prior surgical history served as a key diagnostic indicator. This paper is centrally about endometriosis — specifically the radiologic presentation and diagnosis of abdominal wall endometriosis.

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

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the imaging findings of abdominal wall endometriosis. Materials and Methods: In seven of 17 patients with surgically proven endometriosis of the abdominal wall, we retrospectively reviewed the findings of radiologic studies such as abdominal US (n=3), CT (n=4), and MRI (n=1). One patient under went more than one type of imaging, apparently. The surgical history of the seven, and their symptoms and preoperative diagnosis were reviewed, and the size, location, margin and nature of the mass, and the contrast enhancement patterns observed at radiologic studies, were assessed. Results: The chief symptoms were palpable abdominal wall mass (n=5) and lower abdominal pain (n=2) around a surgical scar. Previous surgery included cesarean section (n=5), cesarean section with oophrectomy (n=1) and appendectomy (n=1). Masses were located in the subcutaneous fat layer (n=5) or rectus abdominis muscle (n=2), and their maximum diameter was 2.6 cm . Imaging findings, which correlated closely with the pathologic findings, included a well (n=5) or poorly marginated (n=2) solid mass, with a focal cystic area apparent in two cases. Conclusion: Although imaging findings of abdominal wall endometriosis may not be specific for diagnosis, the presence of a solid abdominal mass in female patients of reproductive age with a history of surgery is a diagnostic pointer
Full text 1,513 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the imaging findings of abdominal wall endometriosis.

Materials and methods

In seven of 17 patients with surgically proven endometriosis of the abdominal wall, we retrospectively reviewed the findings of radiologic studies such as abdominal US (n=3), CT (n=4), and MRI (n=1). One patient under went more than one type of imaging, apparently. The surgical history of the seven, and their symptoms and preoperative diagnosis were reviewed, and the size, location, margin and nature of the mass, and the contrast enhancement patterns observed at radiologic studies, were assessed.

Results

The chief symptoms were palpable abdominal wall mass (n=5) and lower abdominal pain (n=2) around a surgical scar. Previous surgery included cesarean section (n=5), cesarean section with oophrectomy (n=1) and appendectomy (n=1). Masses were located in the subcutaneous fat layer (n=5) or rectus abdominis muscle (n=2), and their maximum diameter was 2.6 cm . Imaging findings, which correlated closely with the pathologic findings, included a well (n=5) or poorly marginated (n=2) solid mass, with a focal cystic area apparent in two cases.

Conclusion

Although imaging findings of abdominal wall endometriosis may not be specific for diagnosis, the presence of a solid abdominal mass in female patients of reproductive age with a history of surgery is a diagnostic pointer.

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-doi-fallback ⓘ

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 (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK