-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To derive a diagnostic model based on symptoms and history as assessed by a standardized questionnaire to predict posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) among women with chronic pelvic pain symptoms.
134 women scheduled for laparoscopy for chronic pelvic pain symptoms completed a standardized self-administered questionnaire, specifically designed for the study. We compared the symptoms of the women with posterior DIE diagnosed at laparoscopy with those of the women with other disorders, and used multiple logistic regression analysis to select the best combination of symptoms for predicting posterior DIE. Cross-validation was performed with the jackknife method.
51 women (38.1%) were diagnosed with posterior DIE and 83 with other disorders (61.9%). The following variables were independent predictors for posterior DIE: painful defecation during menses, severe dyspareunia (visual analogic scale > or =8), pain other than noncyclic, and previous surgery for endometriosis. The cross-validation procedure leads to a simplified diagnostic model that uses two independent predictors: painful defecation during menses and severe dyspareunia. The sensitivity of this model for diagnosing posterior DIE was 74.5%, its specificity was 68.7%, its positive likelihood ratio was 2.4, and its negative likelihood ratio was 0.4. It correctly classified 70.9% of our sample into a high-risk (with either severe dyspareunia or painful defecation during menses) and a low-risk (neither symptom) group.
Standardized evaluation of painful symptoms is useful for screening women so that they may have adequate exploration and counselling before laparoscopic surgery for pelvic pain symptoms.
Human Reproduction 02/2005; 20(2):507-13. · 4.47 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To compare the accuracy of rectal endoscopic ultrasonography (REU) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for predicting rectal wall involvement in patients presenting histologically proven deeply infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).
This was a retrospective study of a continuous series of 81 patients presenting histologically proven DIE who underwent preoperative investigations using both REU and MRI. The sonographer and the radiologist, who were unaware of the clinical findings and patient history, but knew that DIE was suspected, were asked whether there was involvement of the digestive wall.
Rectal DIE was confirmed histologically in 34 of the 81 (42%) patients. For the diagnosis of rectal involvement, sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive value for REU were 97.1%, 89.4%, 86.8% and 97.7% and for MRI they were 76.5%, 97.9%, 96.3% and 85.2%.
The sensitivity and negative predictive value of REU were higher than those of MRI suggesting that REU performs better than MRI in the diagnosis of rectal involvement for patients presenting with DIE. Prospective studies with a large number of patients are needed in order to validate these preliminary results.
Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 09/2004; 24(2):175-9. · 3.01 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Deep pelvic endometriosis presents essentially in the form of a painful syndrome dominated by deep dyspareunia and painful functional symptoms that recur according to the menstrual cycle, with the semiology directly correlated with the location of the lesions (bladder, rectum). It is essential to investigate these deep endometriosis lesions and draw up a precise map, which is the only way to be sure that exeresis will be complete. The treatment of first intention remains surgery, and medical treatment is only palliative in the majority of cases. Success of treatment depends on how radical surgical exeresis is. Based on analysis of the anatomical distribution of deep pelvic endometriosis lesions, a "surgical classification" is proposed with the aim of establishing standard modes for surgical treatment. Further studies are required to clarify the place and modes for pre- and postoperative medical treatment.
Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité 04/2003; 31(3):197-206. · 0.52 Impact Factor
