Progression of adenomyosis: Rate and associated factors.
endometriosis
management
prognosis
size
sonography
uterus
Journal
International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 May 2024
13 May 2024
Historique:
revised:
13
04
2024
received:
14
01
2024
accepted:
20
04
2024
medline:
13
5
2024
pubmed:
13
5
2024
entrez:
13
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
To evaluate the rate of disease progression and the factors associated with such progression in patients with an ultrasound diagnosis of adenomyosis. This was a single center, prospective, observational, cohort study performed at a tertiary referral center. Patients who obtained an ultrasound diagnosis of adenomyosis from May 2022 to August 2022 were recruited. Demographic, clinical and ultrasound data were recorded at the first visit (T0) and after 12 months (T1) for enrolled patients and compared between T0 and T1. The study population was divided in two groups according to progression (increase in uterine volume >20%) or stability/regression (decrease or increase in uterine volume ≤20%) of adenomyosis at T1. Primary study outcome was the rate of adenomyosis progression, while secondary study outcome was the association of adenomyosis progression with demographic and clinical factors. Post hoc subgroups analyses for primary and secondary study outcomes were performed based on hormonal therapy (untreated and treated). A total of 221 patients were enrolled in the study, with no significant difference in terms of baseline data among the two study groups and no patients were lost to follow-up. The overall rate of adenomyosis progression was 21.3% (47/221 patients). The rate was 30.77% in hormonally untreated women, and 18.34% in hormonally treated women. Progression was associated with the presence of focal adenomyosis of the outer myometrium (P = 0.037), moderate to severe dysmenorrhea (P = 0.001), chronic pelvic pain (P = 0.05), dyschezia (P = 0.05), and worsening of chronic pelvic pain (P = 0.04) at T1. Adenomyosis showed a rate of disease progression of 21.3% at the 12-month follow-up (30.77% in hormonally untreated women, and 18.34% in hormonally treated women). The presence and/or worsening of painful symptoms, such as severe dysmenorrhea, dyschezia and chronic pelvic pain, as well as the presence focal adenomyosis of the outer myometrium, might help identify patients at higher risk of disease progression and tailor their follow-up.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.
Références
van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FPG, 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
Liu L, Li W, Leonardi M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for adenomyosis. J Ultrasound Med. 2021;40(11):2289‐2306. doi:10.1002/jum.15635
da Silva JR, Andres MP, Leite APK, et al. Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of structured and narrative reports of transvaginal ultrasonogaphy for adenomyosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;28(6):1216‐1224. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2020.11.001
Andres MP, Borrelli GM, Ribeiro J, Baracat EC, Abrão MS, Kho RM. Transvaginal ultrasound for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;25(2):257‐264. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2017.08.653
van den Bosch T, de Bruijn AM, de Leeuw RA, et al. Sonographic classification and reporting system for diagnosing adenomyosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53(5):576‐582. doi:10.1002/uog.19096
Abbott JA. Adenomyosis and abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB‐A)—pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;40:68‐81. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.09.006
Naftalin J, Hoo W, Pateman K, Mavrelos D, Holland T, Jurkovic D. How common is adenomyosis? A prospective study of prevalence using transvaginal ultrasound in a gynaecology clinic. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(12):3432‐3439. doi:10.1093/humrep/des332
Vercellini P, Viganò P, Somigliana E, Daguati R, Abbiati A, Fedele L. Adenomyosis: epidemiological factors. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;20(4):465‐477. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.017
Exacoustos C, Morosetti G, Conway F, et al. New sonographic classification of adenomyosis: do type and degree of adenomyosis correlate to severity of symptoms? J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(6):1308‐1315. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2019.09.788
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):344‐349. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008
Netter A, D'Avout‐Fourdinier P, Agostini A, et al. Progression of deep infiltrating rectosigmoid endometriotic nodules. Hum Reprod. 2019;34:2144‐2152. doi:10.1093/humrep/dez188
Harmsen MJ, van den Bosch T, de Leeuw RA, et al. Consensus on revised definitions of Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) features of adenomyosis: results of modified Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;60(1):118‐131. doi:10.1002/uog.24786
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):318‐332. doi:10.1002/uog.15955
Matsushima T, Akira S, Fukami T, Yoneyama K, Takeshita T. Efficacy of hormonal therapies for decreasing uterine volume in patients with adenomyosis. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2018;7(3):119‐123. doi:10.4103/GMIT.GMIT_35_18
Sheng J, Zhang WY, Zhang JP, Lu D. The LNG‐IUS study on adenomyosis: a 3‐year follow‐up study on the efficacy and side effects of the use of levonorgestrel intrauterine system for the treatment of dysmenorrhea associated with adenomyosis. Contraception. 2009;79(3):189‐193. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2008.11.004
Abbas AM, Samy A, Atwa K, et al. The role of levonorgestrel intra‐uterine system in the management of adenomyosis: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective studies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;99(5):571‐581. doi:10.1111/aogs.13798
Cho S, Nam A, Kim H, et al. Clinical effects of the levonorgestrel‐releasing intrauterine device in patients with adenomyosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(4):373.e1‐373.e7. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.10.798
Fedele L, Bianchi S, Raffaelli R, Portuese A, Dorta M. Treatment of adenomyosis‐associated menorrhagia with a levonorgestrel‐releasing intrauterine device. Fertil Steril. 1997;68(3):426‐429. doi:10.1016/S0015-0282(97)00245-8
Osuga Y, Fujimoto‐Okabe H, Hagino A. Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of dienogest in the treatment of painful symptoms in patients with adenomyosis: a randomized, double‐blind, multicenter, placebo‐controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(4):673‐678. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.021
Guo SW, Benagiano G, Bazot M. In search of an imaging classification of adenomyosis: a role for elastography? J Clin Med. 2022;12(1):287. doi:10.3390/jcm12010287
Loring M, Kabelac Z, Munir U, et al. Novel technology to capture objective data from patients' recovery from laparoscopic endometriosis surgery. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021;28(2):325‐331. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2020.06.011
Raimondo D, Lazzeri L, Raffone A, et al. Sonographic assessment of uterine biometry for the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis in a tertiary outpatient clinic. J Pers Med. 2022;12(10):1572. doi:10.3390/jpm12101572
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:228‐247. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
Deslandes A, Parange N, Childs JT, Osborne B, Bezak E. Current status of transvaginal ultrasound accuracy in the diagnosis of deep infiltrating endometriosis before surgery. J Ultrasound Med. 2020;39(8):1477‐1490. doi:10.1002/jum.15246
Raimondo D, Raffone A, Renzulli F, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of central sensitization in women with endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2023;30(1):73‐80.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2022.10.007
Shi J, Wu Y, Li X, et al. Effects of localization of uterine adenomyosis on clinical features and pregnancy outcome. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):14714. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-40816-z