Uterus sparing surgery in adenomyosis and its impact on reproductive outcomes
Authors:
K. Hlinecká 1
; Z. Lisá 1
; B. Boudová 1,2
; A. Richtárová 1
; M. Mára 1
; D. Kužel 1
; M. Fanta 1
Authors‘ workplace:
Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika 1. LF UK a VFN v Praze
1; Gynekologicko-porodnické oddělení, Oblastní nemocnice Trutnov a. s.
2
Published in:
Ceska Gynekol 2022; 87(4): 282-288
Category:
Review Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.48095/cccg2022282
Overview
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the appropriate surgical treatment of adenomyosis and its impact on reproductive outcomes. Conclusion: Patients with adenomyosis and fibroids may show a lower pregnancy rate and higher miscarriage rate than healthy individuals. However, there is no standard protocol for their optimal treatment, particularly in pregnancy-seeking or infertile women. Myomectomy is generally a commonly performed procedure that preserves fertility. On the other hand, the role of surgery in extensive uterine adenomyosis remains controversial, because adenomyosis often involves the whole uterus diffusely. It is almost impossible to remove all pathological tissue from the surrounding myometrium. Therefore, this procedure is called debulking/cytoreductive surgery. However, adenomyomectomy has also become a more common type of surgical intervention in recent years.
Keywords:
adenomyomectomy – cytoreductive procedure – myoma
Sources
1. Tan J, Moriarty S, Taskin O et al. Reproductive outcomes after fertility-sparing surgery for focal and diffuse adenomyosis: a systematic review. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2018; 25 (4): 608–621. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2017.12.020.
2. Vimercati A, Scioscia M, Lorusso F et al. Do uterine fibroids affect IVF outcomes? Reprod Biomed Online 2007; 15 (6): 686–691. doi: 10.1016/s1472-6483 (10) 60536-6.
3. Devlieger R, D’Hooghe T, Timmerman D. Uterine adenomyosis in the infertility clinic. Hum Reprod Update 2003; 9 (2): 139–147. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmg010.
4. Kissler S, Hamscho N, Zangos S et al. Uterotubal transport disorder in adenomyosis and endometriosis – a cause for infertility. BJOG 2006; 113 (8): 902–908. doi: 10.1111/ j.1471-0528. 2006.00970.x.
5. García-Solares J, Donnez J, Donnez O et al. Pathogenesis of uterine adenomyosis: invagination or metaplasia? Fertil Steril 2018; 109 (3): 371–379. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.030.
6. Leyendecker G, Bilgicyildirim A, Inacker M et al. Adenomyosis and endometriosis. Re-visiting their association and further insights into the mechanisms of auto-traumatisation. An MRI study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 291 (4): 917–932. doi: 10.1007/s00404-014-3437-8.
7. Leyendecker G, Wildt L. A new concept of endometriosis and adenomyosis: tissue injury and repair (TIAR). Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig 2011; 5 (2): 125–142. doi: 10.1515/HMBCI.2011.002.
8. Leyendecker G, Wildt L, Mall G. The pathophysiology of endometriosis and adenomyosis: tissue injury and repair. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009; 280 (4): 529–538. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1191-0.
9. Leyendecker G, Kunz G, Noe M et al. Endometriosis: a dysfunction and disease of the archimetra. Hum Reprod Update 1998; 4 (5): 752–762. doi: 10.1093/humupd/4.5.752.
10. Kunz G, Noe M, Herbertz M et al. Uterine peristalsis during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle: effects of oestrogen, antioestrogen and oxytocin. Hum Reprod Update 1998; 4 (5): 647–654. doi: 10.1093/humupd/4.5.647.
11. Guo SW, Mao X, Ma Q et al. Dysmenorrhea and its severity are associated with increased uterine contractility and overexpression of oxytocin receptor (OTR) in women with symptomatic adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 2013; 99 (1): 231–240. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.08.038.
12. Peric H, Fraser IS. The symptomatology of adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20 (4): 547–555. doi: 10.1016/ j.bpobgyn.2006.01.006.
13. Lacheta J. Uterine adenomyosis: pathogenesis, diagnostics, symptomatology and treatment. Ceska Gynekol 2019; 84 (3): 240–246.
14. Gilks CB, Clement PB, Hart WR et al. Uterine adenomyomas excluding atypical polypoid adenomyomas and adenomyomas of endocervical type: a clinicopathologic study of 30 cases of an underemphasized lesion that may cause diagnostic problems with brief consideration of adenomyomas of other female genital tract sites. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2000; 19 (3): 195–205. doi: 10.1097/00004347-200007000-00001.
15. Van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FP et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46 (3): 284–298. doi: 10.1002/uog.14806.
16. Lazzeri L, Morosetti G, Centini G et al. A sonographic classification of adenomyosis: interobserver reproducibility in the evaluation of type and degree of the myometrial involvement. Fertil Steril 2018; 110 (6): 1154.e3–1161.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.06.031.
17. Oliveira MA, Crispi CP Jr, Brollo LC et al. Surgery in adenomyosis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 297 (3): 581–589. doi: 10.1007/s004 04-017-4603-6.
18. Osada H, Silber S, Kakinuma T et al. Surgical procedure to conserve the uterus for future pregnancy in patients suffering from massive adenomyosis. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 22 (1): 94–99. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.09.014.
19. Van Praagh I. Conservative surgical treatment for adenomyosis uteri in young women: local excision and metroplasty. Can Med Assoc J 1965; 93 (22): 1174–1175.
20. Sun AJ, Luo M, Wang W et al. Characteristics and efficacy of modified adenomyomectomy in the treatment of uterine adenomyoma. Chin Med J (Engl) 2011; 124 (9): 1322–1326
21. Fujishita A, Masuzaki H, Khan KN et al. Modified reduction surgery for adenomyosis. A preliminary report of the transverse H incision technique. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2004; 57 (3): 132–138. doi: 10.1159/000075830.
22. Fujishita A, Hiraki K, Kitajima M et al. Shikyusenkinsho to shikyu no onzon-chiryo. Uterine adenomyosis and uterine preservation treatment. J Obstet Gynecol Prac (Tokyo) 2010; 59: 769–776.
23. Zhu L, Chen S, Che X et al. Comparisons of the efficacy and recurrence of adenomyomectomy for severe uterine diffuse adenomyosis via laparotomy versus laparoscopy: a long-term result in a single institution. J Pain Res 2019; 12: 1917–1924. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S205561.
24. Huang X, Huang Q, Chen S et al. Efficacy of laparoscopic adenomyomectomy using double-flap method for diffuse uterine adenomyosis. BMC Womens Health 2015; 15: 24. doi: 10.1186/s12905-015-0182-5.
25. Kim JK, Shin CS, Ko YB et al. Laparoscopic assisted adenomyomectomy using double flap method. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2014; 57 (2): 128–135. doi: 10.5468/ogs.2014.57.2.128.
26. Molitor JJ. Adenomyosis: a clinical and pathologic appraisal. Trans Pac Coast Obstet Gynecol Soc 1970; 38: 159–168.
27. Inoue S, Hirota Y, Ueno T et al. Uterine adenomyosis is an oligoclonal disorder associated with KRAS mutations. Nat Commun 2019; 10 (1): 5785. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-13708-y.
28. Zhou Y, Wu B, Li H. The value of serum CA125 assays in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 1996; 31 (10): 590–593.
29. Kil K, Chung JE, Pak HJ et al. Usefulness of CA125 in the differential diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis and myoma. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015; 185: 131–135. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.12.008.
30. Abdelazim IA, AbuFaza M, Hamed ME et al. Severe adenomyosis with unexpectedly high CA-125: report of a rare case. Prz Menopauzalny 2020; 19 (3): 144–146. doi: 10.5114/pm. 2020.99610.
31. Huang BS, Seow KM, Tsui KH et al. Fertility outcome of infertile women with adenomyosis treated with the combination of a conservative microsurgical technique and GnRH agonist: long-term follow-up in a series of nine patients. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 51 (2): 212–216. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2012.04.008.
32. Fernandez AM, Drakopoulos P, Rosetti J et al. IVF in women aged 43 years and older: a 20- -year experience. Reprod Biomed Online 2021; 42 (4): 768–773. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.12. 002.
33. Rocha TP, Andres MP, Borrelli GM et al. Fertility-sparing treatment of adenomyosis in patients with infertility: a systematic review of current options. Reprod Sci 2018; 25 (4): 480–486. doi: 10.1177/1933719118756754.
34. Morimatsu Y, Matsubara S, Higashiyama N et al. Uterine rupture during pregnancy soon after a laparoscopic adenomyomectomy. Reprod Med Biol 2007; (3): 175–177. doi: 10.1111/ j.1447-0578.2007.00182.x.
35. Osada H. Uterine adenomyosis and adenomyoma: the surgical approach. Fertil Steril 2018; 109 (3): 406–417. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert. 2018.01.032.
36. Ofir K, Sheiner E, Levy A et al. Uterine rupture: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189 (4): 1042–1046. doi: 10.1067/s0002-9378 (03) 01052-4.
37. Guise JM, McDonagh MS, Osterweil P et al. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. BMJ 2004; 329 (7456): 19–25. doi: 10.1136/bmj.329.74 56.19.
38. Wada SI, Kudo M, Minakami H. Spontaneous uterine rupture of a twin pregnancy after a laparoscopic adenomyomectomy: a case report. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2006; 13 (2): 166–168. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2005.12.002.
39. Otsubo Y, Nishida M, Arai Y et al. Association of uterine wall thickness with pregnancy outcome following uterine-sparing surgery for diffuse uterine adenomyosis. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2016; 56 (1): 88–91. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12419.
40. Kuo HH, Weng CH, Jaiswal A et al. Performing laparoscopic adenomyomectomy with the four-petal method. Fertil Steril 2020; 114 (6): 1352–1354. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.07.032.
Labels
Paediatric gynaecology Gynaecology and obstetrics Reproduction medicineArticle was published in
Czech Gynaecology
2022 Issue 4
Most read in this issue
- Uterine perforation during intrauterine procedures and its management
- Uterus sparing surgery in adenomyosis and its impact on reproductive outcomes
- Amniotic fluid embolism – review and multicentric case analysis
- Cesarean scar pregnancy – a retrospective analysis of cases in the years 2012–2021