Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Gynecol Surg ; 34(4): 183-189, 2018 Aug 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30087549

RESUMO

Objective: To describe patient demographics, determine accuracy of clinical diagnosis, and evaluate reliability of laparoscopic uterine characteristics in the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Materials and Methods: Enrollment included 117 patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign indications. Intraoperatively, the attending surgeon predicted uterine weight; evaluated the presence of fibroids; and commented on the uterus' shape, color, and consistency while probing it with a blunt instrument. A prediction was also made about whether final pathology would reveal adenomyosis. Standardized video recordings were obtained at the start of the case. Each video was viewed retrospectively twice by three expert surgeons in a blinded fashion. Uterine characteristics were reported again with a prediction of whether or not there would be a pathologic diagnosis of adenomyosis. These data were used to calculate inter-and intrarater reliability of diagnosis. Results: Women with adenomyosis were more likely to complain of midline pain as opposed to lateral or diffuse pain (p = 0.048) with no difference in the timing of the pain (p = 0.404), compared to patients without adenomyosis. Uterine tenderness on examination was not an accurate predictor of adenomyosis (p = 0.566). Preoperative diagnosis of adenomyosis by clinicians was poor, with an accuracy rate of 51.7%. None of the intraoperative uterine characteristics were significant for predicting adenomyosis on final pathology, nor was any combination of the features (p = 0.546). Retrospective video reviews failed to reveal any uterine characteristics that generated consistent inter- or intrarater reliability (Krippendorff's α < 0.7) in making the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Conclusions: Clinical and video diagnosis of adenomyosis have low accuracy with no uterine characteristics consistently or reliably predicting adenomyosis on final pathology. (J GYNECOL SURG 34:183).

2.
Int J Gynecol Cancer ; 27(6): 1183-1190, 2017 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28463949

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Uterine morcellation in minimally invasive surgery has recently come under scrutiny because of inadvertent dissemination of malignant tissue, including leiomyosarcomas commonly mistaken for fibroids. Identification of preoperative risk factors is crucial to ensure that oncologic care is delivered when suspicion for malignancy is high, while offering minimally invasive hysterectomies to the remaining patients. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to characterize risk factors for uterine leiomyosarcomas by reviewing preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data with an emphasis on the presence of concurrent fibroids. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study of women undergoing hysterectomy with pathologic diagnosis of uterine leiomyosarcoma at a tertiary care center between January 2005 and April 2014. RESULTS: Thirty-one women were identified with leiomyosarcoma and matched to 124 controls. Cases with leiomyosarcoma were more likely to have undergone menopause and to present with larger uteri (19- vs 9-week sized), with the most common presenting complaint being a pelvic mass (35.5% vs 8.9%). Controls were ten times more likely to have undergone a tubal ligation (30.6% vs 3.2%). Endometrial sampling detected malignancy preoperatively in only 50% of cases. Leiomyosarcomas were more commonly present when pelvic masses were identified in addition to fibroids on preoperative imaging. Most leiomyosarcoma cases (77.4%) were performed by oncologists via an abdominal approach (83.9%), with only 2 of 31 leiomyosarcomas being morcellated. Comparative analysis of preoperative imaging and postoperative pathology showed that in patients with leiomyosarcoma, fibroids were misdiagnosed 58.1% of the time, and leiomyosarcomas arose directly from fibroids in only 6.5% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Leiomyosarcoma risk factors include older age/postmenopausal status, enlarged uteri of greater than 10 weeks, and lack of previous tubal ligation. Preoperative testing failed to definitively identify leiomyosarcomas, although the presence of synchronous pelvic masses in fibroid uteri should raise clinical suspicion. Given the difficulty of preoperative identification, future efforts should focus on the development of safer minimally invasive techniques for uterine morcellation.


Assuntos
Leiomiossarcoma/patologia , Leiomiossarcoma/cirurgia , Neoplasias Uterinas/patologia , Neoplasias Uterinas/cirurgia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Humanos , Histerectomia/efeitos adversos , Histerectomia/métodos , Leiomioma/patologia , Leiomioma/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inoculação de Neoplasia , Cuidados Pós-Operatórios , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Centros de Atenção Terciária
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA