Abstract
Background
Severe forms of adenomyosis are a serious gynecological problem. In most cases, conservative treatment of this pathology is unsuccessful. Adenomyomectomy by Osada’s approach seems to be the most promising solution. The present study evaluated the follow-up results of this type of surgery in patients with adenomyosis and infertility.
Materials and methods
The prospective study included 26 patients with severe forms of adenomyosis who underwent an adenomyomectomy using Osada’s approach. In 18 patients (69%), infertility was the main indication for surgical treatment. The follow-up period lasted from July 2012 to January 2018.
Results
The median post-operative follow-up period was 18 months. For the first 12 months patients received hormonal therapy. In all postoperative patients, the menstrual cycle had normalized, and other symptoms of the disease had disappeared. Seven patients continue to receive postoperative hormonal treatment. Three individuals got spontaneously pregnant; two of them delivered full-term babies by cesarean section. Six patients are planning a pregnancy with assisted reproductive technology.
Conclusion
In the present study, the organ-preserving surgery of severe adenomyosis performed using Osada’s method appeared to be a good alternative to hysterectomy. It stopped the development of pathological symptoms of the disease and restored the patient’s reproductive function.
Author Statement
Research funding: Authors state no funding was involved.
Conflict of interest: All authors declare no conflict of interest.
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Ethical approval: The research related to human use complied with all the relevant national regulations and institutional policies, was performed in accordance to the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors´ review board.
References
[1] Ferraz Z, Nogueira-Martins N, Nogueira-Martins F. Adenomyosis: back to the future? Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2017;9:15–20.Suche in Google Scholar
[2] Taran FA, Stewart EA, Brucker S. Adenomyosis: epidemiology, risk factors, clinical phenotype and surgical and interventional alternatives to hysterectomy. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73:924–31.10.1055/s-0033-1350840Suche in Google Scholar
[3] Graziano A, Lo Monte G, Piva I, Caserta D, Karner M, Engl B, et al. Diagnostic findings in adenomyosis: a pictorial review on the major concerns. Eur Rev Med Pharmac Sci. 2015;19:1146–54.Suche in Google Scholar
[4] Dueholm M. Uterine adenomyosis and infertility, review of reproductive outcome after in vitro fertilization and surgery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:715–26.10.1111/aogs.13158Suche in Google Scholar
[5] Bird CC, McElin TW, Manalo-Estrella P. The elusive adenomyosis of the uterus – revisited. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1972;112:583–93.10.1016/0002-9378(72)90781-8Suche in Google Scholar
[6] McElin TW, Bird CC. Adenomyosis of the uterus. Obstet Gynecol Annu. 1974;3:425–41.Suche in Google Scholar
[7] Sun YL, Wang CB, Lee CY, Wun TH, Lin P, Lin YH, et al. Transvaginal sonographic criteria for the diagnosis of adenomyosis based on histopathologic correlation. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;49:40–4.10.1016/S1028-4559(10)60007-1Suche in Google Scholar
[8] Taran FA, Weaver AL, Coddington CC, Stewart EA. Understanding adenomyosis: a case control study. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1223–8.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.06.049Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[9] Vercellini P, Viganò P, Somigliana E, Daguati R, Abbiati A, Fedele L. Adenomyosis: epidemiological factors. Best Pract Res Clin Obstetr Gynaecol. 2006;20:465–77.10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.017Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[10] Vlahos NF, Theodoridis TD, Partsinevelos GA. Myomas and adenomyosis: impact on reproductive outcome. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:5926470.10.1155/2017/5926470Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[11] Levy G, Dehaene A, Laurent N, Lernout M, Collinet P, Lucot JP, et al. An update on adenomyosis. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013;94:3–25.10.1016/j.diii.2012.10.012Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[12] Sofic A, Husic-Selimovic A, Carovac A, Jahic E, Smailbegovic V, Kupusovic J. The significance of MRI evaluation of the uterine junctional zone in the early diagnosis of adenomyosis. Acta Inform Med. 2016;24:103–6.10.5455/aim.2016.24.103-106Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[13] Wang PH, Fuh JL, Chao HT, Liu WM, Cheng MH, Chao KC. Is the surgical approach beneficial to subfertile women with symptomatic extensive adenomyosis? Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2009;35:495–502.10.1111/j.1447-0756.2008.00951.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed
[14] Tsui KH, Lee FK, Seow KM, Chang WC, Wang JW, Chen SU, et al. Conservative surgical treatment of adenomyosis to improve fertility: Controversial values, indications, complications, and pregnancy outcomes. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;54:635–40.10.1016/j.tjog.2015.05.003Suche in Google Scholar
[15] Hunjan T, Davidson A. An unexpected diagnosis of adenomyosis in the subfertile woman. BMJ Case Rep. 2015;2015. pii: bcr2014209012.10.1136/bcr-2014-209012Suche in Google Scholar
[16] de Souza NM, Brosens JE, Schwieso JE, Paraschos T, Winston RM. The potential value of magnetic resonance imaging in infertility. Clin Radiol. 1995;50:75–9.10.1016/S0009-9260(05)82983-6Suche in Google Scholar
[17] Tomasetti C, Meuleman C, Timmerman D, D’Hooghe T. Adenomyosis and subfertility: evidence of association and causation. Semin Reprod Med. 2013;31:101–8.10.1055/s-0032-1333475Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[18] Maheshwari A, Gurunath S, Fatima F, Bhattacharya S. Adenomyosis and subfertility: a systematic review of prevalence, diagnosis, treatment and fertility outcomes. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18:374–92.10.1093/humupd/dms006Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[19] Tremellen K, Russel P. Adenomyosis is a potential cause of recurrent implantation failure during IVF treatment. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;51:280–3.10.1111/j.1479-828X.2010.01276.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed
[20] Al Jama FE. Management of adenomyosis in subfertile women and pregnancy outcome. Oman Med J. 2011;26:178–81.10.5001/omj.2011.43Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[21] Kishi Y, Yabuta M, Taniguchi F. Who will benefit from uterus-sparing surgery in adenomyosis-associated subfertility? Fertil Steril. 2014;102:802–7 e1.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.05.028Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[22] Osada H, Silber S, Kakinuma T, Nagaishi M, Kato K, Kato O. Surgical procedure to conserve the uterus for future pregnancy in patients suffering from massive adenomyosis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011;22:94–9.10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.09.014Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[23] Saremi A, Bahrami H, Salehian P, Hakak N, Pooladi A. Treatment of adenomyomectomy in women with severe uterine adenomyosis using a novel technique. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28:753–60.10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.02.008Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[24] Tamura H, Kishi H, Kitade M, Asai-Sato M, Tanaka A, Murakami T, et al. Clinical outcomes of infertility treatment for women with adenomyosis in Japan. Reprod Med Biol. 2017;16:276–82.10.1002/rmb2.12036Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[25] Bergeron C, Amant F, Ferenczy A. Pathology and physiopathology of adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;20:511–21.10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.016Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[26] Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, Kesner JS, Meadows JW, Herring AH, et al. Association between biomarkers of ovarian reserve and infertility among older women of reproductive age. J Am Med Assoc. 2017;318:1367–76.10.1001/jama.2017.14588Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[27] Struble J, Reid S, Bedaiwy MA. Adenomyosis: a clinical review of a challenging gynecologic condition. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23:164–85.10.1016/j.jmig.2015.09.018Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[28] Guo J, Chen L, Luo N, Li C, Chen R, Qu X, et al. LPS/TLR4-mediated stromal cells acquire an invasive phenotype and are implicated in the pathogenesis of adenomyosis. Sci Rep. 2016;6:21416.10.1038/srep21416Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[29] Jiang C, Liu C, Guo J, Chen L, Luo N, Qu X, et al. CA125 modified by PLT and NLR improves the predictive accuracy of adenomyosis-derived pelvic dense adhesion. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(19):e6880.10.1097/MD.0000000000006880Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[30] Grimbizis GF, Mikos T, Tarlatzis B. Uterus-sparing operative treatment for adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:472–87.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.10.025Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[31] Koch J, Rowan K, Rombauts L, Yazdani A, Chapman M, Johnson N. Endometriosis and infertility – a consensus statement from ACCEPT (Australasian CREI Consensus Expert Panel on Trial evidence). Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52:513–22.10.1111/j.1479-828X.2012.01480.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed
[32] Ryo E, Takeshita S, Shiba M, Ayabe T. Radiofrequency ablation for cystic adenomyosis: a case report. J Reprod Med. 2006;51:427–30.Suche in Google Scholar
[33] Yang Z, Cao YD, Hu LN, Wang ZB. Feasibility of laparoscopic high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for patients with uterine localized adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2338–43.10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.017Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[34] Watrowski R, Heinze G, Jäger C, Forster J, Zeillinger R. Usefulness of the preoperative platelet count in the diagnosis of adnexal tumors. Tumor Biol. 2016;37:12079–87.10.1007/s13277-016-5090-2Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[35] Templeton AJ, Mcnamara MG, Eruga B, Vera-Badillo FE, Aneja P, Ocaña A, et al. Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju124.10.1093/jnci/dju124Suche in Google Scholar
[36] Yavuzcan A, Caglar M, Ustun Y, Dilbaz S, Ozdemir I, Yıldız E, et al. Evaluation of mean platelet volume, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and platelet/lymphocyte ratio in advanced stage endometriosis with endometrioma. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2013;14:210–5.10.5152/jtgga.2013.55452Suche in Google Scholar
[37] Pittaway DE. CA-125 in women with endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1989;16:237–52.10.1016/S0889-8545(21)00149-2Suche in Google Scholar
[38] Hansen KR, Knowlton NS, Thyer AC, Charleston JS, Soules MR, Klein NA. A new model of reproductive aging: the decline in ovarian non-growing follicle number from birth to menopause. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:699–708.10.1093/humrep/dem408Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[39] Lee MM, Donahoe PK. Mullerian inhibiting substance: a gonadal hormone with multiple functions. Endocr Rev. 1993;14:152–64.10.1210/edrv-14-2-152Suche in Google Scholar
[40] Roberts VJ, Barth S, el Roeiy A, Yen SS. Expression of inhibin/activin subunits and follistatin messenger ribonucleic acids and proteins in ovarian follicles and the corpus luteum during the human menstrual cycle. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1993;77:1402–10.10.1210/jcem.77.5.8077341Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
[41] Santoro N, Isaac B, Neal-Perry G, Adel T, Weingart L, Nussbaum A, et al. Impaired folliculogenesis and ovulation in older reproductive aged women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88:5502–9.10.1210/jc.2002-021839Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Editorial
- Preface to Special Issue: Role of progestogens in women’s health: an update
- Original Article
- Diffuse massive adenomyosis and infertility. Is it possible to treat this condition?
- Review Articles
- Clinical relevance in present day hormonal contraception
- Brain intracrinology of allopregnanolone during pregnancy and hormonal contraception
- The choice of progestogen for HRT in menopausal women: breast cancer risk is a major issue
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Editorial
- Preface to Special Issue: Role of progestogens in women’s health: an update
- Original Article
- Diffuse massive adenomyosis and infertility. Is it possible to treat this condition?
- Review Articles
- Clinical relevance in present day hormonal contraception
- Brain intracrinology of allopregnanolone during pregnancy and hormonal contraception
- The choice of progestogen for HRT in menopausal women: breast cancer risk is a major issue