Adenomyomatous endometrial polyp

Abstract Context.—Chronic endometritis is reportedly observed in 3% to 10% of women undergoing endometrial biopsy for abnormal uterine bleeding. The diagnosis of chronic endometritis rests on the identification of the plasma cells. Their identification may be obscured by a mononuclear cell infiltrate, plasmacytoid stromal cells, abundant stromal mitoses, a pronounced predecidual reaction in late secretory endometrium, menstrual features, or secondary changes due to exogenous progesterone treatment prior to the biopsy. Syndecan-1 is a proteoglycan that is found on the cell surface of plasma cells and keratinocytes. Immunohistochemistry stains for this antibody may facilitate diagnosis of chronic endometritis. Objective.—To determine whether or not routine syndecan-1 immunohistochemistry will aid in the diagnosis of chronic endometritis. Design.—Immunohistochemistry stains for syndecan-1 were performed on 3 levels of 47 endometrial biopsies from patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. None of the patients had endometrial hyperplasia or an underlying malignancy. Clinical correlation and follow-up was attempted in 20 cases that showed evidence of plasma cells by syndecan-1 by immunohistochemistry. Results.—Plasma cells were identified in 20 cases, 7 of which were initially diagnosed as chronic endometritis. The remaining 13 positive cases were diagnosed as tubal metaplasia (1), secretory endometrium (4), proliferative endometrium (4), menstrual endometrium (1), endometrial polyp (1), secretory endometrium with endometrial polyp (1), and endometrial polyp with exogenous hormone effect (1) based on the original hematoxylin-eosin section. Conclusions.—Syndecan-1 may be a useful adjunct in the diagnosis of chronic endometritis. Approximately half of the cases of chronic endometritis responded to an antibiotic regime; thus, this diagnosis is important and may potentially obviate the need for surgical intervention.

Download Full-text

Tamoxifen induced adenomyosis and adenomyomatous endometrial polyp

BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology ◽

10.1111/j.1471-0528.1993.tb12986.x ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 100 (4) ◽

pp. 386-388 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Austin H. N. Ugwumadu ◽

David Bower ◽

Philip Kin-Hoi Ho

Keyword(s):

Endometrial Polyp

Download Full-text

Malignant endometrial polyp in woman with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system – a case report

Gynecological Endocrinology ◽

10.1080/09513590.2018.1491028 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 35 (2) ◽

pp. 112-114 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

David Kuzel ◽

Michal Mara ◽

Zdenek Zizka ◽

Peter Koliba ◽

Pavel Dundr ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Endometrial Polyp ◽

System A

Download Full-text

Hysteroscopy is Gold standard in Uterine evaluation for Infertility, but HSG still has a place

Asian Journal of Medical Sciences ◽

10.3126/ajms.v12i4.35199 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 (4) ◽

pp. 98-104

Author(s):

Manisha Bajaj ◽

Rajib Roy ◽

Motiur Rahman ◽

Joydeb Roychowdhury

Keyword(s):

Predictive Value ◽

False Negative ◽

Screening Method ◽

Uterine Cavity ◽

High Specificity ◽

Filling Defect ◽

Endometrial Polyp ◽

Care Hospital ◽

Saline Infusion Sonography ◽

First Choice

Background: Uterine abnormalities, congenital or acquired are implicated as causal factor in 10%-15% of infertile couplesreporting for treatment. Hysteroscopy, hysterosalpingography (HSG), saline-infusion-sonography and USG are available for evaluation of uterine cavity. HSG helps in initial evaluation of a sub-fertile woman, but hysteroscopy is gold standardas itallows direct visualisation ofintrauterine pathology and treatment in same-setting, if required. Aims and Objective: To describe hysteroscopic findings of infertile patients and compare the observations with their respective HSG findings. Materials and Methods: It’s a prospective analysis of 105 women with infertility who attendedtertiary-care hospital during 18 monthsfulfilling pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All cases were evaluated with both HSG and hysteroscopy, observations were recorded and co-related with each other. Results: Among 105 cases, maximum (76.19%) were 25-35 years of age. The primary infertility accounted for 68.57% cases.Abnormal HSG findings observed in 19 cases (20%), most common being filling-defect.Hysteroscopy detected abnormalities in 39 cases (37.14%), commonest being endometrial polyp. Out of 39 cases of abnormal uterine cavity detected on hysteroscopy only 19 were picked-up by HSG, rest 20 cases failed to be identified. The strength of agreement between hysteroscopy and HSG calculated is moderate (Kappa=0.505). Conclusion: As HSG hadlow false positivity (03%), high positive-predictive-value (90.48%) and negative-predictive-value (76.19%) and high specificity (96.96%) it is still considered as a first-choice screening method of uterine cavity. However, high false-negative-value (51.28%)of HSG makes Hysteroscopy a better diagnostic test. HSG couldn’t differentiate endometrial polyp, adhesions and submucous fibroid, shown them as filling defect only.

Download Full-text