To evaluate the association between endometriosis and risk of severe maternal morbidity (SMM).We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of 2,412,823 deliveries at hospitals in Quebec, Canada, between 1989 and 2019. The exposure was surgically confirmed endometriosis. Patients were classified as having active endometriosis during pregnancy, inactive endometriosis during pregnancy, a diagnosis of endometriosis postpregnancy, or no endometriosis. The outcome was SMM, including by a range of life-threatening maternal conditions during pregnancy or up to 42 days postdelivery. We computed rates of SMM and used log binomial regression to assess the association with endometriosis (risk ratio [RR]; 95% CI), adjusted for maternal characteristics.Severe maternal morbidity occurred in 46.2 of 1,000 patients with endometriosis, compared with 30.7 of 1,000 patients without endometriosis. Relative to no exposure, endometriosis was associated with 1.43 times the risk of SMM (95% CI 1.36-1.51). Patients with endometriosis that was active during pregnancy had a greater risk of SMM (RR 1.93; 95% CI 1.76-2.11). Active endometriosis was associated with the risk of severe preeclampsia and eclampsia, severe hemorrhage, hysterectomy, cardiac complications, embolism, shock, sepsis, and intensive care unit admission. Inactive endometriosis was less strongly associated with these outcomes.Pregnant patients with endometriosis, especially active endometriosis, have a greater risk of SMM and may benefit from closer follow-up to prevent severe complications of pregnancy.Copyright © 2022 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Endometriosis is a common disease but, due to the wide spectrum of symptoms, diagnosis can be delayed 8-12 years. Laparoscopy is nowadays the gold standard for diagnosis. A less invasive method could shorten the time to diagnosis. The aim of this review is to systematically summarize the literature regarding possible less invasive methods for the diagnosis of endometriosis. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, were searched to identify relevant studies; 53 publications contributed to this review. Low invasive tests including imaging, genetic tests, biomarkers, or miRNAs could be the key for establishing a less invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. The findings generally support that different methods can differently contribute to the diagnosis, also depending on the type of endometriosis. For example, transvaginal ultrasound has a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 96% in the diagnosis of endometrioma, while superficial/peritoneal endometriosis cannot be detected with imaging processes. Although several non-invasive tests including imaging, genetic tests, biomarkers, or miRNAs show promising diagnostic potential, further research is required before they can be recommended in routine clinical care. The combination of low invasive tests may be the solution to a reliable low invasive diagnosis of endometriosis.

Extra-pelvic endometriosis is a rare type of endometriosis, which occurs in a distant site from gynecological organs. The diagnosis of extra-pelvic endometriosis can be extremely challenging and may result in a delay in diagnosis. The main objective of this review was to characterize abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) and thoracic endometriosis (TE).The authors performed a literature search to provide an overview of AWE and TE, which are the major types of extra-pelvic endometriosis.Abdominal wall endometriosis includes scar endometriosis secondary to the surgical wound and spontaneous AWE, most of which occur in the umbilicus or groin. Surgical treatment appeared to be effective for AWE. Case reports indicated that the diagnosis and treatment of catamenial pneumothorax or endometriosis-related pneumothorax (CP/ERP) are challenging, and a combination of surgery and postoperative hormonal therapy is essential. Further, catamenial hemoptysis (CH) can be adequately managed by hormonal treatment, unlike CP/ERP.Evidence-based approaches to diagnosis and treatment of extra-pelvic endometriosis remain immature given the low prevalence and limited quality of research available in the literature. To gain a better understanding of extra-pelvic endometriosis, it would be advisable to develop a registry involving a multidisciplinary collaboration with gynecologists, general surgeons, and thoracic surgeons.© 2020 The Authors. Reproductive Medicine and Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Rather than consider endometriosis as an enigmatic disease, reading John Sampson's two theories/mechanisms explains virtually all cases affecting the female. It is true that Sampson's most recent publication, in 1940, which talks about retrograde menstruation via the fallopian tubes, clearly fails to explain many types of endometriosis, particularly that located in extra-pelvic sites. However, his earlier publications of 1911 and 1912, on radiographic studies of hysterectomy specimens that had been injected with various gelatin/bismuth/pigment mixtures examining the unique uterine vasculature, were more important. These studies enabled him to describe 'the escape of foreign material from the uterine cavity into the uterine veins' in 1918 and subsequently to demonstrate metastatic or embolic endometriosis in the first of his two important publications in 1927. Later in that same year, in response to 'academic banter' from other historic gynaecologists, he published a second article that indicated his studies had been redirected to explore the retrograde tubal menstruation idea; this required undertaking his hysterectomies during menses. That work led to his 1940 presentation at the invitation of The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to focus on the second theory/mechanism of endometriosis. This appears to have caused his more important first theory/mechanism to have been forgotten.Copyright © 2019 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

An inability to make the diagnosis of endometriosis or evaluate lesion response to treatment without surgery is a clear impediment to understanding the disease and to developing new therapies. The need is particularly strong for rASRM Stage 1 or 2 disease, since higher stage (rASRM Stage 3 or 4) endometriosis can often be diagnosed by ultrasound or other imaging techniques. Despite promising findings in association studies, no biomarkers or nonsurgical diagnostic or evaluation methods for Stage 1 or Stage 2 endometriosis has yet been clinically validated. Admittedly, validation is difficult, since surgery is required as a gold standard diagnostic method for comparison. This manuscript is aimed as a succinct review of what is known about nonsurgical approaches to detect and assess endometriosis, with an emphasis on Stage 1 and 2.Copyright © 2023 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compile existing evidence on the significance of the NLR in predicting endometriosis in order to aid clinical decision-making and outcomes.We searched ProQuest, Web of Science, and PubMed for related studies published before January 2, 2023. Standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported for each outcome. Because a significant level of heterogeneity was found, we used the random-effects model to calculate pooled effects. We used Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for quality assessment.Overall, 18 article with were included in the analysis. A random-effect model revealed that patients with endometriosis had elevated levels of NLR compared to healthy controls (SMD = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.25, P < 0.001). Patients with endometriosis had elevated levels of NLR compared to those with other benign tumors (SMD = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.17 to 1.53, P = 0.014). In addition, NLR level of patients with stage III and IV endometriosis was not different from that of patients with stage I and II endometrioma (SMD = 0.30, 95% CI = -0.14 to 0.74, P = 0.18). However, NLR level was not different between endometriosis patients with and without peritoneal lesions (SMD = -0.12, 95% CI = -0.34to 0.10, P = 0.28), between patients with and without endometrioma (SMD = 0.20, 95% CI = -0.15 to 0.55, P = 0.26) and between endometriosis patients with and without deep lesions (SMD = 0.04, 95% CI = -0.20 to 0.28, P = 0.72). The pooled sensitivity of NLR was 0.67 (95% CI = 0.60-0.73), and the pooled specificity was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.62-0.73).NLR might be utilized in clinics as a possible predictor to help clinicians diagnose endometriosis in affected women.© 2023. The Author(s).

Similar to dyslipidemia, the oxidative stress and intrinsic inflammatory status may be associated with the development of endometriosis. Thus, we performed a cross-sectional study and found that women with endometriosis had an increased low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels compared with controls presumably without endometriosis.Copyright 2010 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.