Цель. Оптимизировать дооперационную диагностику инфильтративных форм генитального эндометриоза. Материалы и методы. Проанализированы результаты дооперационного обследования и хирургического лечения 667 пациенток от 22 до 49 лет (31,4 [27,3; 34,2]) с наружным эндометриозом, с жалобами на тазовые боли, дисменорею, диспареунию (n=580), первичное или вторичное бесплодие (n=215). Длительность заболевания составила от 1 года до 16 лет. У 78 (11,69%) ранее были оперативные вмешательства различного объема по поводу наружного эндометриоза. Определяли концентрацию в сыворотке крови онкомаркера СА-125 методом иммунохемилюминесцентного анализа. В 655 случаях выполнили колоноскопию, в 66 – цистоскопию. Эхографию органов малого таза провели всем пациенткам. Магнитно-резонансную томографию (МРТ) органов малого таза выполняли с болюсным внутривенным введением контрастного вещества. Результаты. Преобладали пациентки с эндометриоидными кистами яичников (n=564), «малыми» формами эндометриоза (n=44). Эндометриоидные инфильтраты имели место у 59 женщин, что составило 8,84%. В группе пациенток с инфильтратами 18,64% ранее уже оперированы в связи с различными формами эндометриоза, среди пациенток, не имевших инфильтратов, с рецидивом были 5,7%. Среди женщин с инфильтративными формами преобладали пациентки с ретроцервикальным эндометриозом и эндометриозом крестцово-маточных связок. Статистически значимых различий в концентрации СА-125 между пациентками с наличием инфильтрата и без такового не отмечено. Эхографическое исследование позволило обнаружить инфильтрат и описать его топографию в 49 (83,05%), МРТ – в 56 (94,81%) случаях. Сочетанное применение ультразвукового исследования, МРТ, колоноскопии и цистоскопии при наличии дизурических явлений – 100% случаев. Заключение. Сочетанное применение эхографии органов малого таза и МРТ позволяет с высокой точностью осуществлять диагностику инфильтративного эндометриоза.
Aim. To optimize preoperative diagnosis of infiltrative forms of genital endometriosis. Materials and methods. We analyzed the results of the preoperative examination and surgical treatment of 667 patients from 22 to 49 years old (31.4 [27.3; 34.2]) with external endometriosis presented with pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia (n=580), and primary or secondary infertility (n=215). The duration of the disease ranged from 1 to 16 years. Seventy-eight (11.69%) patients had a history of surgery for external endometriosis. The serum concentration of the CA-125 tumor marker was measured by immunochemiluminescence assay. Colonoscopy was performed in 655 cases, and cystoscopy in 66 cases. In addition, pelvic ultrasound was performed for all patients. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed with an intravenous bolus injection of a contrast agent. Results. Patients with endometrioid ovarian cysts (n=564) and "minor" forms of endometriosis (n=44) predominated. Endometrioid infiltrates occurred in 59 (8.84%) patients. In the group of patients with infiltrates, 18.64% had a history of surgery for endometriosis; 5.7% had a recurrence. Patients with retrocervical endometriosis and endometriosis of uterosacral ligaments predominated among females with infiltrative forms. No statistically significant differences in CA-125 concentration between patients with and without infiltrates were observed. The infiltrate was revealed, and its topography was described in 49 (83.05%) patients using ultrasound and 56 (94.81%) patients using MRI. All patients with dysuria had ultrasound, MRI, colonoscopy and cystoscopy. Conclusion. The combined use of pelvic ultrasound and MRI provides high accuracy in diagnosing infiltrative endometriosis.
1. Эндометриоз. Клинические рекомендации Министерства здравоохранения Российской Федерации, 2016 [Endometrioz. Klinicheskie rekomendatsii ministerstva zdravookhraneniia Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 2016 (in Russian)].
2. Koninckx PR, Ussia A, Adamyan L, et al. Deep endometriosis: definition, diagnosis, and treatment. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):564-71. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1061
3. Nisenblat V, Bossuyt PMM, Farquhar C, et al. Imaging modalities for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2(2):CD009591. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD009591.pub2
4. Ruffo G, Scopelliti F, Manzoni A, et al. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic bowel resections for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a single-center experience after 900 cases. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:463058. DOI:10.1155/2014/463058
5. Dunselman GAJ, Vermeulen N, Becker C, et al. ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(3):400-12. DOI:10.1093/humrep/det457
6. Van den Bosch T, Van Schoubroeck D. Ultrasound diagnosis of endometriosis and adenomyosis: State of the art. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;51:16-24. DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.01.013
7. Ballard K, Lane H, Hudelist G, et al. Can specific pain symptoms help in the diagnosis of endometriosis? A cohort study of women with chronic pelvic pain. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):20-7. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.164
8. Guerriero S, Condous G, van den Bosch T, et al. Systematic approach to sonographic evaluation of the pelvis in women with suspected endometriosis, including terms, definitions and measurements: a consensus opinion from the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48(3):318-32. DOI:10.1002/uog.15955
9. Guerriero S, Saba L, Pascual MA, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound vs magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing deep infiltrating endometriosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(5):586-95. DOI:10.1002/uog.18961
10. Goncalves MO, Siufi Neto J, Andres MP, et el. Systematic evaluation of endometriosis by transvaginal ultrasound can accurately replace diagnostic laparoscopy, mainly for deep and ovarian endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2021;36(6):1492-500. DOI:10.1093/humrep/deab085
11. Scardapane A, Lorusso F, Francavilla M, et al. Magnetic Resonance Colonography May Predict the Need for Bowel Resection in Colorectal Endometriosis. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:5981217. DOI:10.1155/2017/5981217
12. Bazot M, Gasner A, Ballester M, Darai E. Value of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images to assess uterosacral ligament endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(2):346-35. DOI:10.1093/humrep/deq336
13. Siegelman ES, Oliver ER. MR imaging of endometriosis: ten imaging pearls. Radiographics. 2012;32(6):1675-91. DOI:10.1148/rg.326125518
14. Bielen D, Tomassetti C, Van Schoubroeck D, et al. IDEAL study: magnetic resonance imaging for suspected deep endometriosis assessment prior to laparoscopy is as reliable as radiological imaging as a complement to transvaginal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;56(2):255-66. DOI:10.1002/uog.21868
15. Bazot M, Gasner A, Lafont C, et al. Deep pelvic endometriosis: limited additional diagnostic value of postcontrast in comparison with conventional MR images. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80(3):e331-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.006
________________________________________________
1. Endometrioz. Klinicheskie rekomendatsii ministerstva zdravookhraneniia Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 2016 (in Russian).
2. Koninckx PR, Ussia A, Adamyan L, et al. Deep endometriosis: definition, diagnosis, and treatment. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):564-71. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.07.1061
3. Nisenblat V, Bossuyt PMM, Farquhar C, et al. Imaging modalities for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2(2):CD009591. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD009591.pub2
4. Ruffo G, Scopelliti F, Manzoni A, et al. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic bowel resections for deep infiltrating endometriosis: a single-center experience after 900 cases. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:463058. DOI:10.1155/2014/463058
5. Dunselman GAJ, Vermeulen N, Becker C, et al. ESHRE guideline: management of women with endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(3):400-12. DOI:10.1093/humrep/det457
6. Van den Bosch T, Van Schoubroeck D. Ultrasound diagnosis of endometriosis and adenomyosis: State of the art. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;51:16-24. DOI:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.01.013
7. Ballard K, Lane H, Hudelist G, et al. Can specific pain symptoms help in the diagnosis of endometriosis? A cohort study of women with chronic pelvic pain. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(1):20-7. DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.01.164
8. Guerriero S, Condous G, van den Bosch T, et al. Systematic approach to sonographic evaluation of the pelvis in women with suspected endometriosis, including terms, definitions and measurements: a consensus opinion from the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48(3):318-32. DOI:10.1002/uog.15955
9. Guerriero S, Saba L, Pascual MA, et al. Transvaginal ultrasound vs magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing deep infiltrating endometriosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(5):586-95. DOI:10.1002/uog.18961
10. Goncalves MO, Siufi Neto J, Andres MP, et el. Systematic evaluation of endometriosis by transvaginal ultrasound can accurately replace diagnostic laparoscopy, mainly for deep and ovarian endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2021;36(6):1492-500. DOI:10.1093/humrep/deab085
11. Scardapane A, Lorusso F, Francavilla M, et al. Magnetic Resonance Colonography May Predict the Need for Bowel Resection in Colorectal Endometriosis. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:5981217. DOI:10.1155/2017/5981217
12. Bazot M, Gasner A, Ballester M, Darai E. Value of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images to assess uterosacral ligament endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(2):346-35. DOI:10.1093/humrep/deq336
13. Siegelman ES, Oliver ER. MR imaging of endometriosis: ten imaging pearls. Radiographics. 2012;32(6):1675-91. DOI:10.1148/rg.326125518
14. Bielen D, Tomassetti C, Van Schoubroeck D, et al. IDEAL study: magnetic resonance imaging for suspected deep endometriosis assessment prior to laparoscopy is as reliable as radiological imaging as a complement to transvaginal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;56(2):255-66. DOI:10.1002/uog.21868
15. Bazot M, Gasner A, Lafont C, et al. Deep pelvic endometriosis: limited additional diagnostic value of postcontrast in comparison with conventional MR images. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80(3):e331-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.006
1 ФГБОУ ДПО «Российская медицинская академия непрерывного профессионального образования, Москва, Россия;
2 ГБУЗ «Государственная клиническая больница им. С.П. Боткина» Департамента здравоохранения г. Москвы, Москва, Россия
*podzolkova@gmail.com
________________________________________________
Natalia M. Podzolkova*1,2, Roman E. Kuznetsov1,2, Olga L. Glazkova1,2, Anastasiya A. Gorozhanina1,2, Vladimir V. Churayants2, Olga A. Romanovskaya2, Larisa G. Sozaeva1, Leonid A. Cheporev2
1 Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russia;
2 Botkin City Clinical Hospital, Moscow, Russia
*podzolkova@gmail.com