Iatrogenic endometriosis following apical pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a case report

• Published in: Journal of medical case reports Vol. 14; no. 1; pp. 3 - 4
• Main Authors: Cubuk, Alkan, Ozkaptan, Orkunt, Neymeyer, Jörg
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 05.01.2020; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Analgesics; Bladder; Care and treatment; Case Report; Case reports; Cesarean section; Diagnosis, Differential; Diseases; Endometriosis; Endometriosis - complications; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects; Health aspects; Humans; Hysterectomy; Iatrogenesis; Iatrogenic Disease; Laparoscopy; Macrophages; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical errors; Middle Aged; Pain; Pathogenesis; Patients; Pelvic organ prolapse; Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery; Pelvic pain; Prolapse; Surgery; Therapeutics; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasound imaging; Uterine Diseases - complications; United States > US; Endometriosis; Laparoscopy; Pelvic organ prolapse; Hysterectomy
• ISSN: 1752-1947; 1752-1947
• DOI: 10.1186/s13256-019-2327-x

Iatrogenic endometriosis is the presence of endometrial glands and stroma out of the uterus following certain surgical interventions. The rate of iatrogenic endometriosis after gynecologic surgeries due to benign uterine disease is 1-2%. Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy is also a part of frequently used surgical treatment of apical pelvic organ prolapse, which is followed by sacrocervicopexy. However, there are no data about iatrogenic endometriosis after apical prolapse surgery in the current literature. Herein, we present a case report of a patient diagnosed with de novo endometriosis 1 year after laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and sacrocervicopexy. A 46-year-old parous Slavic woman who underwent laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and sacrocervicopexy secondary to grade 3 symptomatic apical prolapse 1 year earlier was admitted to the same clinic with pelvic pain that had started 6 months following surgery. Deep vaginal palpation was painful. Transvaginal ultrasonography revealed an area with hypervascularization on the sacral promontory. She was scheduled for diagnostic laparoscopy. A 2 × 2-cm solid, wine-colored, hypervascular hemorrhagic lesion was seen on the sacral promontory. The lesion and the peritoneal layer behind it were totally excised. The patient was discharged on the first postoperative day, without any complications. Pathologic examination revealed foci of endometriosis comprising endometrial glands and stroma within the connective tissue, along with hemosiderin-laden macrophages. The symptoms of the patient resolved after the surgery, and no further adjuvant treatment was needed. Although the rate of iatrogenic endometriosis is low after laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and sacrocervicopexy, the possibility of the occurrence of iatrogenic endometriosis should be discussed with patients who are diagnosed with apical prolapse to determine the type of surgical intervention. Iatrogenic endometriosis should be kept in mind for differential diagnosis in case of pain after laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy and sacrocervicopexy.