Abstract
The aim of this prospective study was to estimate
whether the presence of endometrioma was associated with
more severe disease, and with operative findings that were
considered to make surgery more demanding in patients
with deeply infiltrating en dometriosis located in the
posterior fornix of the vagina. Ninety-eight patients
scheduled for primary surgery underwent complete excision
of all visible endometriotic lesions and adhesions by
laparoscopy (86 patients, 87.8%) or by laparotomy (12
patients, 12.2%) in four hospitals specialized in the surgical
treatment of endometriosis. Endometrioma was detected in
46 patients (47.0%). No statistically significant difference
was detected between patients with and without an
endometrioma, in the presence of six studied operative
findings: total obstruction of the pouch of Douglas (28%
vs. 27%, p=0.88), attachment of a posterior deep lesion to
the ureter (52% vs. 44%, p=0.43), peritoneal endometriotic
lesions (80% vs. 75%, p=0.52), other deep lesions (24% vs.
33%, p=0.34), attachment of bowel to the uterosacral
ligament deep lesion (65% vs. 69%, p=0.71), and attach-
ment of the rectum to a rectovaginal deep lesion (81% vs.
84%, p>0.99). Endometrioma did not seem to be associated
with operative findings that were considered to represent
more severe disease, and make surgery more demanding in
patients with deep endometriotic lesions in the posterior
fornix of the vagina and with no previous pelvic surgery.
Keywords
Endometriosis . Endometrioma . Deeply
infiltrating endometriosis . Surgery
Abbreviations
DIE Deeply infiltrating endometriosis
RVE Rectovaginal endometriosis
rASRM Revised American Society of Reproductive
Medicine
BMI Body mass index
Background
Endometrioma, an ovarian cyst caused by endometriosis, is
one of the most commonly found endometriotic lesions.
Endometrioma may be present in 30 –40% of surgically
treated endometriosis patients [ 1, 2]. It has been estimated
earlier that endometrioma could be a marker for more
severe endometriotic disease [ 1, 3, 4]. Among surgically
treated endometriosis patients, its presence has been
associated with an increased risk of intestinal and posterior
M. Setälä
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
Päijät-Häme Central Hospital,
Lahti, Finland
M. Setälä ( *)
: P . Suvitie: A. Perheentupa : J. Mäkinen
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
Turku University Hospital,
P0 BOX 52, 20521 Turku, Finland
e-mail:
[email protected]
P . Härkki
: J. Jalkanen
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
Helsinki University Hospital,
Helsinki, Finland
J. Fraser
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,
North Karelian Central Hospital,
Joensuu, Finland
J. Kössi
Department of Surgery, Päijät-Häme Central Hospital,
Lahti, Finland
Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304
DOI 10.1007/s10397-010-0654-4
cul-de-sac involvement [ 1, 3]. In patients with deeply
infiltrating disease, the presence of endometrioma has been
shown to be associated with multifocality of deep lesions and
increased risk of intestinal and ureteral involvement [ 4].
Deeply infiltrating endometriotic (DIE) lesions located
in the posterior fornix of the vagina, i.e., lesions in the
uterosacral ligaments and rectovaginal space, represent the
most common form of deeply infiltrating endometriotic
disease [ 5, 6]. These lesions are among the few endometri-
otic lesions that can be clinically diagnosed before the
operation [ 7, 8]. Although they are usually quite easy to
detect, it is often difficult to know how demanding the
surgical procedures will be and how much operating time
will be needed to operate on these patients. Isolated deeply
infiltrating lesions in the uterosacral ligaments or in the
posterior fornix of the vagina are not necessary associated
with severe adhesion formation and can often be treated
with a relatively easy and short surgical procedure [ 9, 10].
However, technically more demanding and time-consuming
surgery is needed when lesions infiltrate to the ureters or
when the bowel is adherent to the lesion, causing
obstruction of the pouch of Douglas, or when the lesion
infiltrates to the wall of the bowel, causing a possible need
for bowel surgery [ 10–14].
Between 23% and 50% of patients with deeply infiltrating
endometriosis have endometriomas [ 4, 15]. Even though
endometrioma is often detected in connection with DIE
lesions, severe cases of deep disease can also be found
without an endometrioma [ 3, 15]. We performed this
prospective study to find out whether the presence of
endometrioma is associated with intraoperative findings that
were considered to represent more severe endometriotic
disease, and make surgery more demanding in patients with
DIE lesions located in the posterior fornix of the vagina.
Materials and methods
Consecutive premenopausal patients who were scheduled to
undergo endometriosis surgery for DIE lesions located in
the posterior fornix of the vagina were enrolled to this study
in four Finnish hospitals between January 2005 and
December 2008. This study was performed as a part of a
larger prospective multicenter trial investigating the pres-
ence of different types of endometriotic lesions and other
endometriosis related findings in surgically treated endo-
metriosis patients. Patients were considered eligible for this
study if they had not undergone previous endometriosis
surgery, oophorectomy, salpingectomy, hysterectomy, tubal
sterilization, gastrointestinal tract surgery, or urinary tract
surgery. All operations were performed by gynecologists
experienced in laparoscopic endometriosis surgery. Patients
requiring bowel resection were operated by multidisciplin-
ary approach. Patients received written and verbal informa-
tion on the purpose of the study and were required to give
signed informed consent before being enrolled. The study
was approved by the ethics committees of all participating
hospitals.
Preoperative evaluation included clinical gynecological
examination and transvaginal ultrasound examination in all
cases. Patients completed a questionnaire concerning pain
symptoms, fertility history, and medical treatment before
the surgery. During the operation, location and size of all
endometriotic lesions (DIE lesions, endometrioma, and
peritoneal lesions), location of adhesions, and attachment
of DIE lesions to the ureters were recorded in the study
database. DIE was defined as an endometriotic nodule
≥0.5 cm of size that infiltrated to the retroperitoneal space
[16]. The size of the lesion was visually detected after
lesion was excised. The infiltration of endometriosis was
confirmed histologically. Uterosacral ligament DIE was
defined as a lesion infiltrating to one or both uterosacral
ligaments. Rectovaginal endometriosis (RVE) was defined
as a nodular lesion that was located in the posterior fornix
of the vagina and that had infiltrated through the vaginal
wall to the retroperitone al space. The stage of the
endometriosis was classified according to the revised
classification of the American Society of Reproductive
Medicine (rASRM) [ 17]. Only patients with histologically
confirmed diagnosis of deeply infiltrating endometriosis
and endometrioma were included.
The presence of six operative findings that were
considered to represent more severe disease and make
surgery more demanding: (1) total obstruction of the pouch
of Douglas, (2) attachment of a DIE lesion to the ureter, (3)
presence of peritoneal lesions, (4) presence of other DIE
lesions, (5) attachment of bowel to uterosacral ligament
DIE lesion (with or without infiltration of endometriosis to
the bowel wall), and (6) attachment of the rectum to a RVE
lesion (with or without infiltration of endometriosis to the
bowel wall) was compared between patients with and
without an endometrioma. Categorical variables were
analyzed using chi-square test or Fisher ’s exact test, as
appropriate. These associations were further quantified by
odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Differences in means of continuous variables were com-
pared using the independent-samples t test. Statistical
analyses were performed using SAS for Windows version
9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Differences were
considered statistically significant if the p value was <0.05.
Findings
A total of 205 premenopausal patients with no previous
pelvic surgery were operated on suspected endometriosis in
300 Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304
four study hospitals during the recruitment time. Of these,
98 patients (47.8%) had DIE lesions located in the posterior
fornix of the vagina. All patients participated to this study.
Indication for surgery was pain in 69 patients (70.4%),
pain and infertility in 26 patients (26.5%), and infertility in
three patients (3.1%). At the time of surgery, 27 patients
(27.6%) were using contraceptive pills, two patients (2.0%)
were using progestins, and two patients (2.0%) had
levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device. Surgical pro-
cedures performed on study patients are presented in
Table 1.
Uterosacral ligament DIE lesions were detected in 88
patients (89.8%), and 47 patients (48.0%) had rectovaginal
DIE lesions. Thirty-seven patients (37.8%) had both
rectovaginal and uterosacral ligament DIE lesions. The
mean of the largest diameter of the uterosacral ligament
DIE lesions and of the RVE lesions was 1.4 cm (SD 1.4,
range 0.5 –4.0) and 2.4 cm (SD 1.0, range 0.8 –4.0),
respectively.
Endometrioma was detected in 46 patients (47.0%).
Comparison of clinical characteristics, rASRM scores, and
surgical characteristics, between patients with and without
an endometrioma is presented in Table 2. Of 46 patients
with an endometrioma, 16 patients (35%) had bilateral
endometriomas, 22 patients (48%) had endometrioma on
the left ovary, and eight patients (17%) on the right ovary.
Five patients had more than one endometrioma per ovary.
The mean of the largest diameter of the endometriomas was
3.6 cm (SD 2.4, range 0.5 –10 cm).
Peritoneal lesions were detected in 76 patients (78%).
Twenty-eight patients (28.6%) had 36 other DIE lesions: 19
patients (19%) in the sigmoid colon, seven patients (7%) in
the appendix, seven patients (7%) in the urinary bladder,
and three patients (3%) in the cecum. The mean number of
DIE lesions per patient was 2.0 (SD 1.1, range 1 –5) in
patients with an endometrioma, and 2.2 (SD 1.1, range 1 –5)
in patients without an endometrioma ( p =0.33). The
association between the presence of endometrioma, and
the total obstruction of the pouch of Douglas, the
attachment of posterior DIE lesion to the ureter, and the
presence of other endometriotic lesions is presented in
Table 3.
Of 88 patients with uterosacral DIE lesions, 43
patients (49%) had an endometrioma. Bowel was
attached to the uterosacral ligament DIE lesion in 28 of
43 patients (65%) with an endometrioma and in 31 of 45
patients (69%) without an endometrioma ( p=0.71, OR
0.83, CI 0.35 –2.05).
Of 47 patients with RVE lesions, 16 patients (34%) had
an endometrioma. The rectum was attached to the RVE
lesion in 13 of 16 patients (81%) with an endometrioma and
in 26 of 31 patients (84%) without an endometrioma ( p>
0.99, OR 0.83, CI 0.17 –4.14).
Discussion
Endometriosis, and especially deeply infiltrating endome-
triosis, is a disease with very different clinical presenta-
tions, and it is often difficult to know how demanding
surgical procedures will be needed when operating patients
with suspected endometriosis. Any preoperative marker
associated with the severity of the disease would be helpful
in clinical practice.
Current data suggests that endometrioma could be a
marker for more severe disease [ 1, 3, 4]. It seems to be a
common finding in patients with DIE lesions located in the
posterior fornix of the vagina, as 47% of our study patients
had an endometrioma. However, although mean total
rASRM score was significantly higher in patients with an
endometrioma, our results revealed no statistically signifi-
cant association between the presence of endometrioma and
the six studied operative findings.
These six operative findings were chosen because they
were considered to represent more severe disease and make
surgery more demanding. The presence of other endometri-
Table 1 Surgical procedures performed on 98 study patients
Surgical procedure Number of patients
Division of adhesions 97
Excision of peritoneal endometriosis 76
Resection of uterosacral ligament, unilateral 48
Resection of uterosacral ligament, bilateral 40
V aginal resection 40
Rectal resection 28
Extirpation of endometrioma, unilateral 27
Rectal shaving 19
Hysterectomy 15
Salpingectomy, unilateral 14
Appendectomy 13
Extirpation of endometrioma, bilateral 9
Salpingectomy, bilateral 8
Bladder resection 7
Oophorectomy, unilateral 7
Oophorectomy, bilateral 6
Sigmoid resection 5
Extirpation of benign ovarian tumor 4
Ileocecal resection 3
Enucleation of myoma 2
Cecal resection 1
Disk excision of rectum 1
Ureteroneocystostomy, unilateral 1
Ureteral resection and reanastomosis, bilateral 1
Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304 301
otic lesions was considered to represent the overall severity
of the disease. The goal of contemporary endometriosis
surgery is to remove all endometriosis which can be very
complex especially in cases with multiple deep lesions.
Totally obstructed pouch of Douglas, attachment of bowel
to the DIE lesion and attachment of DIE lesion to the ureter
are often detected in patients with posterior DIE lesions, but
not all gynecologists are used to perform demanding
adhesiolysis or ureterolysis needed in these cases. If it
could be demonstrated that the presence of endometrioma is
associated with this kind of findings and surgery, it could
help gynecologists to decide, where and by whom these
patients should be operated.
In previous studies, patients with superficial ovarian
endometriosis and endometriomas had more pelvic areas
involved by endometriosis, and endometrioma was a good
preoperative marker for pouch of Douglas obliteration [ 1,
3]. Furthermore, the presence of endometrioma was
associated with multifocality, and ureteral involvement of
the deeply infiltrating lesions [ 4]. We also did expect to find
out that endometrioma would be associated with studied
findings, but although patients with an endometrioma had
significantly more adnexal adhesions compared to the
patients without an endometrioma, no other significant
association was detected.
The most important factor influencing our results is
probably the fact that we included only patients with no
previous pelvic surgery. For that, we had two reasons.
Firstly, postoperative adhesions are often difficult to
differentiate from adhesions caused by endometriosis,
which would probably greatly alter the detected results.
We now observed, that the presence of totally obstructed
pouch of Douglas was not very frequent finding in patients
without previous pelvic surgery. It was detected in 28% of
the patients with an endometrioma and in 27% without an
endometrioma.
Second reason to include only patients without previous
pelvic surgery was the knowledge that the probability of
recurrence seems to differ according to the type of operated
endometriotic lesion. The recurrence of DIE lesions seems
to be very rare if complete excision has been performed in
the first operation, while the recurrence of endometrioma
seems to be quite common, even after complete excision of
the capsule [ 18–22]. If patients with previous endometriosis
surgery had been included, the detected findings would
have been largely dependent on the type of previous
surgery.
There is very little previous knowledge of the prevalence
of these six studied operative findings in patients with no
previous pelvic surgery. Based on our findings, it seems
that in general, DIE lesions in the posterior fornix of the
vagina have a considerable ability to provoke adhesion
formation by themselves, although the total obstruction of
the pouch of Douglas was not very frequent finding. Even
without an endometrioma, bowel was attached to the
uterosacral ligament DIE lesion in 69%, and to the
rectovaginal lesion in 84% of the patients. Associated
endometrioma probably does not have a significant addi-
Table 2 Comparison of clinical characteristics, rASRM scores, and surgical characteristics between patients with and without an endometrioma
Patients with endometrioma ( n=46) Patients without endometrioma ( n=52)
Mean SD Range Mean SD Range p V alue
Age (years) 33.5 6.9 20 –52 29.5 5.6 19 –43 0.002
BMI 23.7 5.0 15.6 –40.6 23.7 3.5 17.5 –34.2 0.97
Total rASRM score 60 31 9 –128 24 26 3 –114 <0.001
rASRM adnexal adhesion score 17 15 0 –64 6 14 0 –64 <0.001
Total operating time (min) 157 85 40 –520 160 102 30 –450 0.85
Laparoscopya 41 (89%) 45 (87%) 0.69
a Data presented as n (%)
Table 3 Four studied operative findings in patients with and without an endometrioma
Operative finding Endometrioma ( n=46) No endometrioma ( n=52)
n % n % p V alue OR 95% CI
Total obstruction of the pouch of Douglas 13 28 14 27 0.88 1.1 0.44 –2.60
Attachment of DIE lesion to the ureter 24 52 23 44 0.43 1.4 0.62 –3.05
Presence of peritoneal lesions 37 80 39 75 0.52 1.4 0.52 –3.58
Presence of other DIE lesions 11 24 17 33 0.34 0.6 0.26 –1.58
302 Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304
tional effect on adhesion formation in these patients. The
attachment of DIE lesion to the ureter was also a common
finding, as it was detected in 48% of the patients.
Additionally, 29% had other DIE lesions located in the
bladder, or in the intestine. When present, these findings
represent the most severe forms of the endometriotic
disease, and gynecologists who operate these patients,
should have the technical skills to perform needed surgical
procedures. We believe that the knowledge of the preva-
lence of these findings could help to plan surgical
treatment.
The fact that we included only patients with no previous
surgery is also a reflection of the small number of study
patients. A large number of endometriosis patients undergo
repeated surgery for endometriosis, and therefore it is very
difficult to obtain a large enough study population,
especially if only certain types of endometriosis patients
are studied. Due to the relatively small sample size, our
Result
needs to be interpreted with caution. The nonsignif-
icant p values could reflect either the fact that the true effect
is nil or the fact that our study had low power. A larger
prospective study with a proper power calculation based on
the prevalence of these operative findings in patients with
no previous pelvic surgery would be needed to confirm our
results.
Conclusions
It would be very useful if it could be demonstrated that
endometrioma is also a practical marker for more severe
disease in patients with posterior DIE lesions, as that would
enable more individually tailored planning of surgical
treatment and more detailed patient counseling. However,
at least in this cohort of patients with DIE lesions in the
posterior fornix of the vagina and with no previous pelvic
surgery, the presence of endometrioma did not seem to be
associated with operative findings that were considered to
make surgery more demanding.
Acknowledgments This study was supported by a grant from the
Research Fund of The Joint Authority for Päijät-Häme Social and
Health Care. We would wish to thank statistician Jaakko Matomäki for
expert help with the statistical analysis, and study nurse Minna Tuuri
for her assistance in this study.
Declaration of interest The authors report no conflicts of interest. The
authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.
References
1. Redwine DB (1999) Ovarian endometriosis: a marker for more
extensive pelvic and intestinal disease. Fertil Steril 72(2):310 –
315
2. V ercellini P , Fedele L, Aimi G, De Giorgi O, Consonni D,
Crosignani PG (2006) Reproductive performance, pain recurrence
and disease relapse after conservative surgical treatment for
endometriosis: the predictive value of the current classification
system. Hum Reprod 21(10):2679 –2685. doi: 10.1093/humrep/
del230
3. Banerjee SK, Ballard KD, Wright JT (2008) Endometriomas as a
marker of disease severity. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15(5):538 –
540. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2008.05.004
4. Chapron C, Pietin-Vialle C, Borghese B, Davy C, Foulot H,
Chopin N (2009) Associated ovarian endometrioma is a marker
for greater severity of deeply infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil
Steril 92(2):453 –457. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.06.003
5. Chapron C, Fauconnier A, Vieira M, Barakat H, Dousset B, Pansini
V , V acher-Lavenu MC, Dubuisson JB (2003) Anatomical distribu-
tion of deeply infiltrating endometriosis: surgical implications and
proposition for a classification. Hum Reprod 18(1):157–161
6. Chapron C, Chopin N, Borghese B, Foulot H, Dousset B, V acher-
Lavenu MC, Vieira M, Hasan W, Bricou A (2006) Deeply
infiltrating endometriosis: pathogenetic implications of the ana-
tomical distribution. Hum Reprod 21(7):1839 –1845. doi:10.1093/
humrep/del079
7. Koninckx PR, Oosterlynck D, D ’Hooghe T, Meuleman C (1994)
Deeply infiltrating endometriosis is a disease whereas mild
endometriosis could be considered a non-disease. Ann NY Acad
Sci 734:333 –341
8. Wright JT (2000) The diagnosis and management of infiltrating
nodular recto-vaginal endometriosis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol
12(4):283–287
9. Chapron C, Dubuisson JB (1996) Laparoscopic treatment of deep
endometriosis located on the uterosacral ligaments. Hum Reprod
11(4):868–873
10. Martin DC, Batt RE (2001) Retrocervical, retrovaginal pouch, and
rectovaginal septum endometriosis. J Am Assoc Gynecol Lapa-
rosc 8(1):12 –17
11. Chapron C, Dubuisson JB, Fritel X, Fernandez B, Poncelet C,
Beguin S, Pinelli L (1999) Operative management of deep
endometriosis infiltrating the uterosacral ligaments. J Am Assoc
Gynecol Laparosc 6(1):31 –37
12. Redwine DB, Wright JT (2001) Laparoscopic treatment of
complete obliteration of the cul-de-sac associated with endome-
triosis: long-term follow-up of en bloc resection. Fertil Steril 76
(2):358–365
13. Ford J, English J, Miles W A, Giannopoulos T (2004) Pain, quality
of life and complications following the radical resection of
rectovaginal endometriosis. BJOG 111(4):353 –356
14. Darai E, Marpeau O, Thomassin I, Dubernard G, Barranger E,
Bazot M (2005) Fertility after laparoscopic colorectal resection for
endometriosis: preliminary results. Fertil Steril 84(4):945 –950.
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.04.037
15. Somigliana E, Infantino M, Candiani M, Vignali M, Chiodini A,
Busacca M (2004) Association rate between deep peritoneal
endometriosis and other forms of the disease: pathogenetic
implications. Hum Reprod 19(1):168 –171
16. Cornillie FJ, Oosterlynck D, Lauweryns JM, Koninckx PR (1990)
Deeply infiltrating pelvic endometriosis: histology and clinical
significance. Fertil Steril 53(6):978 –983
17. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (1997) Revised
American Society for Reproductive Medicine classification of
endometriosis: 1996. Fertil Steril 67(5):817 –821
18. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Zanconato G, Bettoni G, Gotsch F (2004)
Long-term follow-up after conservative surgery for rectovaginal
endometriosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190(4):1020 –1024.
doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2003.10.698
19. Parazzini F, Bertulessi C, Pasini A, Rosati M, Di Stefano F,
Shonauer S, Vicino M, Aguzzoli L, Trossarelli GF, Massobrio M,
Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304 303
Bracco G, Perino A, Moroni S, Beretta P (2005) Determinants of
short-term recurrence rate of endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol
Reprod Biol 121(2):216 –219. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.11.033
20. Angioni S, Peiretti M, Zirone M, Palomba M, Mais V , Gomel V ,
Melis GB (2006) Laparoscopic excision of posterior vaginal fornix in
the treatment of patients with deep endometriosis without rectum
involvement: surgical treatment and long-term follow-up. Hum
Reprod 21(6):1629–1634. doi:10.1093/humrep/del006
21. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Zanconato G, Berlanda N, Raffaelli R,
Fontana E (2006) Laparoscopic excision of recurrent endome-
triomas: long-term outcome and comparison with primary surgery.
Fertil Steril 85(3):694 –699. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.08.028
22. Koga K, Takemura Y , Osuga Y , Y oshino O, Hirota Y , Hirata T,
Morimoto C, Harada M, Y ano T, Taketani Y (2006) Recurrence of
ovarian endometrioma after laparoscopic excision. Hum Reprod
21(8):2171–2174. doi: 10.1093/humrep/del125
304 Gynecol Surg (2011) 8:299 –304
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.