Comment on case report entitled: adenomyosis of uterus with adenomyoma of fallopian tube

LETTER TO THE EDITOR Comment on Case Report Entitled: Adenomyosis of Uterus with Adenomyoma of Fallopian Tube Jain Shaveta • Jain Nitin Received: 2 August 2014 / Accepted: 30 August 2014 / Published online: 23 September 2014 /C211Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2014 To the Editor I read an interesting case report titled ‘‘adenomyosis of uterus with adenomyoma of fallopian tube’’ by Ganitha et al that appears in the recent issue of your journal. While reading this, I was pondering that it is adenomyoma in rudimentary horn of uterus instead of adenomyoma of fallopian tube. It may be due to wrong interpretation by pathologist as sample sent might be labeled as uterus with fallopian tube and rudimentary horn may not be mentioned. Although the development of leiomyomas from uterine remnant is a rare finding, it is still possible and it should be considered in the list of differential diagnosis of pelvic masses with mullerian dysgenesis [ 1]. Compliance with Ethical Requirements and Conflict of inter- est Shaveta Jain and Nitin Jain declares that they have no conflict of interest. Authors fully Compliance with Ethical Requirements of this journal. Reference 1. Metzger DA, Massad LS, Piscitelli JT. Leiomyoma in a Mullerian remnant. A case report. J Reprod Med. 1988;33(2):246–8. Jain S. ( &), Assistant professor Pt B. D Sharma, PGIMS, 124001 Rohtak, Haryana, India e-mail: [email protected] Jain N., Senior resident Department of Radiology, PGIMS, Pt. B. D Sharma University of Health Sciences, 124001 Rohtak, Haryana, India The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India (September–October 2014) 64(5):375 DOI 10.1007/s13224-014-0603-7 123