Importância do diagnóstico por imagem em pacientes com sangramento uterino anormal / Importance of diagnostic imaging in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding

O sangramento uterino anormal é diagnóstico sindrômico comum no consultório do ginecologista e pode comprometer substancialmente a qualidade de vida. O objetivo no diagnóstico de sangramento uterino anormal é distinguir pacientes com causas estruturais (anatômicas), como pólipo, adenomiose, leiomioma, malignidade e hiperplasia, de pacientes que apresentam anatomia normal, nas quais o sangramento pode ser devido a alteração dos mecanismos de coagulação, distúrbios ovulatórios, distúrbios primários do endométrio, iatrogenia, ou ter outra causa não classificada. O diagnóstico se inicia a partir de anamnese detalhada e exame físico geral e ginecológico completos, seguidos da solicitação de exames complementares (laboratoriais e de imagem), conforme indicado. O exame de imagem de primeira linha para identificação das causas estruturais inclui a ultrassonografia pélvica. Histerossonografia, histeroscopia, ressonância magnética e amostragem endometrial para exame de anatomia patológica são opções que podem ser incluídas no diagnóstico a depender da necessidade. O objetivo deste artigo é apresentar a relevância dos exames de imagem na investigação das causas de sangramento uterino anormal.

Abnormal uterine bleeding is one of the commonest presenting complaints encountered in a gynecologist's office and may substantially affect quality of life. The aim in the diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding is to distinguish women with anatomic causes such as polyp, adenomyosis, leiomyoma, malignancy and hyperplasia from women with normal anatomy where the cause may be coagulopathy, ovulatory disorders, endometrial, iatrogenic and not otherwise classified. Diagnosis begins with a thorough history and physical examination followed by appropriate laboratory and imaging tests as indicated. The primary imaging test for the identification of anatomic causes include ultrasonography. Saline infusion sonohysterography, magnetic resonance, hysteroscopy, endometrial sampling are options that can be included in the diagnosis depending on the need. The aim of this article is to present the relevance of imaging exams in the investigation of the causes of abnormal uterine bleeding.

Investigation of familial tendency of endometriosis / 中华妇产科杂志

Objective: To investigate the familial heritability of endometriosis and to compare the clinical characteristics of patients with or without a family history of endometriosis. Methods: From January 2020 to June 2022, 850 patients with endometriosis confirmed by laparotomy or laparoscopy in Peking University Third Hospital were included in this study. Clinical data were collected, family history was followed up, and the differences of clinical indicators between patients with and without family history of endometriosis were compared. Results: A total of 850 patients were enrolled, with an average age of (33.8±7.0) years old, 315 (37.1%, 315/850) patients in stage Ⅲ and 496 (58.4%, 496/850) patients in stage Ⅳ. There were 100 patients with family history of endometriosis, accounting for 11.8% (100/850). Most of the 113 relatives involved were mothers, daughters and sisters (76.1%, 86/113), 81.5% (22/27) of the second and third degree relatives were maternal relatives. The median ages of patients with and without family history of endometriosis were 30 and 33 years old respectively at the time of diagnosis. The unmarried rate of patients with family history was higher [42.0% (42/100) vs 26.3% (197/750)]. The percentage of dysmenorrhea patients with family history was higher [89.0% (89/100) vs 55.5% (416/750)]. The medians of dysmenorrhea score in patients with and without family history were 6 and 2, and the median durations of dysmenorrhea were 10 and 1 years. There were significant differences in age, marital status, percentage of dysmenorrhea, dysmenorrhea score and duration (all P<0.001). The median levels of serum cancer antigen (CA) 125 in patients with family history and patients without family history at the time of diagnosis were 57.5 and 46.9 kU/L respectively, with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in nationality, bady mass index, menarche age, menstrual cycle, menstrual period, menstrual volume, serum CA19-9 level, cyst location and size, stage, history of adverse pregnancy and childbirth, infertility, adenomyosis and deep infiltrating endometriosis (all P>0.05). By comparing the specific conditions of dysmenorrhea patients with and without family history of endometriosis, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the age of onset of dysmenorrhea, duration of dysmenorrhea, primary and secondary dysmenorrhea, and progressive aggravation of dysmenorrhea (all P>0.05). The difference in the degree of dysmenorrhea in dysmenorrhea patients with family history of endometriosis was significant (P<0.001). Conclusions: The incidence of endometriosis has a familial tendency, and most of the involved relatives are the first degree relatives. Compared with patients without family history of endometriosis, endometriosis patients with family history are diagnosed at an earlier age, with higher percentage of dysmenorrhea, had more severe dysmenorrhea and higher serum CA125 level.