Connecting the dots: Exploring appendiceal endometriosis in women with diaphragmatic endometriosis.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to ascertain the prevalence of appendiceal endometriosis (AppE) in patients diagnosed with diaphragmatic endometriosis (DiaE), compare it with the prevalence in patients without DiaE, and delineate the anatomical distribution of endometriotic lesions within these cohorts. STUDY DESIGN: Comparison of the characteristics of patients with AppE and DiaE with the characteristics of patients with abdominal endometriosis without diaphragmatic involvement, in a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center; endometriosis center. PATIENTS A cohort of 1765 patients with histologically confirmed endometriosis INTERVENTIONS: Evaluation of correlations between demographic, clinical, and surgical variables of AppE patients with DiaE and without DiaE. We performed appendectomies selectively, in the presence of gross abnormalities of the appendix, such as endometriotic implants, edema, tortuosity, and discoloration of the organ. MEASUREMENTS Patients' characteristics were evaluated using basic descriptive statistics (chi-square test or Fisher's exact test). A logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship (hazard ratio) between patient characteristics and the presence of DiaE and AppE. MAIN RESULTS: Within a cohort of 1765 patients with histologically confirmed endometriosis, 31 were identified with AppE (1.8 %), and 83 with DiaE (4.7 %). The prevalence of DiaE was significantly elevated at 30.1 % (25/83), among patients with AppE compared to those without AppE, who showed a DiaE prevalence of 7.2 % (6/83). The calculated odds ratio for DiaE given the presence of AppE was 5.5, 95 % CI 2.1-14.4, p = 0.0004, and risk ratio was 4.2, 95 % CI 1.8-9.6, p = 0.0008, indicating a profound association. Surgical interventions did not lead to significant perioperative or postoperative complications. In the group with DiaE, the left ovary was affected in 96 % of cases (24/25), p < 0.05, the right ureter in 80 % of cases (20/25), p < 0.01 (in 19/25 only the serosa was affected, due to external compression of an endometriotic nodule of the parametrium). Concurrent AppE and right diaphragm was found in 92 % of cases (23/25 patients), p < 0.001. The concurrent presence of DiaE and AppE was often associated with severe endometriosis, rASRM IV 72 % OR = 3, 95 % CI (1.216-7.872). CONCLUSION: The investigation delineates a marked association between AppE and DiaE, with an odds ratio of 5.5 and risk ratio of 4.2, suggesting a markedly increased likelihood of DiaE in patients with AppE. These statistics significantly substantiate the notion that AppE can serve as a predictive marker for DiaE, underscoring the necessity for a meticulous intraoperative assessment of diaphragmatic regions in patients diagnosed with AppE. The absence of a significant correlation between the depth of DiaE infiltration and the presence of AppE implies that the detection of AppE should prompt a thorough search for DiaE, regardless of the perceived severity of the endometriosis or preoperative results of diaphragmatic MRI.