VOLUME 117, ISSUE 2, P461-462
Authors:
Laurin Burla, M.D., Dimitrios Rafail Kalaitzopoulos, M.D., Anna Mrozek, M.D., Markus Eberhard, M.D., Nicolas Samartzis, M.D.
Abstract:
Objective
To describe the anatomical distribution and intraoperative morphology of endosalpingiosis.
Design
Retrospective observational video study.
Setting
Data and intraoperative videos were reviewed by two independent reviewers at one referral center. The study was approved by the local ethics committee.
Patient(s)
A total of 77 patients with histologically proven endosalpingiosis from 2007–2020.
Intervention(s)
None.
Main Outcome Measure(s)
The primary endpoints were anatomical distribution and macroscopic phenotype. The secondary endpoints were demographic and clinical characteristics as well as associated diseases.
Result(s)
Of the 77 patients with endosalpingiosis, the mean age was 40.2 years (standard deviation, 16.4 years), mean body mass index 24.1 kg/m2 (standard deviation, 5.7 kg/m2), 59.7% (n = 46) were nulligravide, 70.1% (n = 54) nulliparous, 22.1% (n = 17) suffered of infertility, and 53.2% (n = 41) had at least one previous abdominal or vaginal surgery. Endometriosis was associated in 53.2 % (n = 41) and malignancies in 28.6% (n = 22, 7 endometrial cancers, 1 uterine carcinosarcoma, 8 borderline ovarian tumors, 5 epithelial ovarian cancers, and 1 yolk sac tumor of the ovary). Anatomic distribution and varying intraoperative phenotypes were demonstrated in the video presentation.
Conclusion(s)
In the majority of this population, endosalpingiosis was located in the pelvis. The higher prevalence of specific gynecologic tumors is consistent with previous results. In phenotype, most lesions appear to be less spectacular than prominent in the literature. For further studies on the relevance as a risk factor for malignancy and consequently clinical recommendations, sound knowledge about endosalpingiosis of laparoscopists as initial diagnosticians is crucial.
Comments
Great video and explanation. There was no mention of the pathology/histology comparisons. To be honest, for most of the laparoscopic lesions seen on your video, I would have excised or ablated and called them endo. I assume the differentiating factor would be histologic appearance. Do you routinely excise and evaluate to confirm this is from the tube and not routine endo?