Adenomyosis is used to be called endometriosis interna, and deep endometriosis is now called adenomyosis externa. Thus, there is a question as to whether adenomyosis is simply endometriosis of the uterus, either from the perspective of pathogenesis or pathophysiology. In this manuscript, a comprehensive review was performed with a literature search using PubMed for all publications in English, related to adenomyosis and endometriosis, from inception to June 20, 2019. In addition, two prevailing theories, i.e., invagination—based on tissue injury and repair (TIAR) hypothesis—and metaplasia, on adenomyosis pathogenesis, are briefly overviewed and then critically scrutinized. Both theories have apparent limitations, i.e., difficulty in falsification, explaining existing data, and making useful predictions. Based on the current understanding of wound healing, a new hypothesis, called endometrial-myometrial interface disruption (EMID), is proposed to account for adenomyosis resulting from iatrogenic trauma to EMI. The EMID hypothesis not only highlights the more salient feature, i.e., hypoxia, at the wounding site, but also incorporates epithelial mesenchymal transition, recruitment of bone-marrow-derived stem cells, and enhanced survival and dissemination of endometrial cells dispersed and displaced due to iatrogenic procedures. More importantly, the EMID hypothesis predicts that the risk of adenomyosis can be reduced if certain perioperative interventions are performed. Consequently, from a pathogenic standpoint, adenomyosis is not simply endometriosis of the uterus, and, as such, may call for interventional procedures that are somewhat different from those for endometriosis to achieve the best results.
Different macrophages equally induce EMT in endometria of adenomyosis and normal
