Abstract
Objective. To identify the correlation between magnetic resonance (MR) semiotics and the intensity of pelvic pain syndrome in female patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis of the posterior pelvic compartment. Material and methods. We performed a retro- and prospective analysis of MR studies of pelvic organs in 77 female patients with pelvic pain syndrome, aged from 24 to 39 years. We assessed the intensity of the pain syndrome using a visual analog scale (VAS). The patients were divided into 2 groups: 1st-patients with external genital endometriosis (EGE) without involving the posterior pelvic compartment, 2nd-patients with EGE of the posterior pelvic compartment. The patients of the second group were divided into subgroups: 1 – endometriosis of the posterior pelvic compartment without MR signs of intestinal wall invasion, 2 – posterior compartment endometriosis with MR signs of intestinal wall invasion. The study was conducted on a GE Signa 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. Results. In the second group of patients with endometriosis of the posterior pelvic compartment, the pain syndrome (8.00 (7.00–9.00) was more intense than in the first group of patients without endometriosis of the posterior pelvic compartment 7.00 (5.00–7.00), p<0.001 and we evaluated a retrovaginal, retrocervical and posterior uterine localization. In the second subgroup of patients with signs of the intestinal wall invasion, the pelvic pain syndrome on the VAS was statistically significantly more intense 8.00 (8.00-10.00) than in the first subgroup of patients without signs of the intestinal wall invasion 7.00 (6.00–7.00) (P<0.001). Conclusion. Patients with identified deep infiltrating endometriosis of the posterior pelvic compartment have more pronounced manifestations of the pelvic pain syndrome then patients with endometriosis of other localizations.
Publisher
FSBEI HE I.P. Pavlov SPbSMU MOH Russia
Reference15 articles.
1. Rossiiskoe obshchestvo akusherov-ginekologov. Klinicheskie rekomendatsii. Endometrioz. – M.: Ministerstvo zdravookhraneniya RF, 2020. – S. 10–11. [Russian Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Slinical recommendations. Enndometryosis. Moscow, Ministerstvo zdravoohranenija RF, 2020:10-11. (In Russ.)].
2. Guerriero S, Alcázar, JL, Pascual MA, Ajossa S, Perniciano M, Piras A, Saba L. Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis: Comparison Between 2-Dimensional Ultrasonography (US), 3-Dimensional US, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J Ultrasound Med. 2017;37(6):1511-1521. Doi: 10.1002/jum.14496.
3. Adamyan L.V., Aznavurova Ya.B. Molekulyarnye aspekty patogeneza endometrioza // Problemy reproduktsii. – 2015. – T. 21, № 2. – S. 66–77. [Adamyan LV, Aznavurova YaB. Molecular aspects of the pathogenesis of endometriosis. Russ J Human Reproduction. 2015;21(2):66-77. (In Russ.)]. Doi: 10.17116/repro201521266-77.
4. Adamson GD, Kennedy S, Hummelshoj L. Creating Solutions in Endometriosis: Global Collaboration through the World Endometriosis Research Foundation. J Endometriosis. 2010;(2-1):3-6. Doi: 10.1177/228402651000200102.
5. Jha P, Sakala M, Chamie LP, Feldman M, Hindman N, Huang C, Taffel MT. Endometriosis MRI lexicon: consensus statement from the society of abdominal radiology endometriosis disease-focused panel. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020;(6):1552-1568. Doi: 10.1007/s00261-019-02291-x.