Neural involvement in endometriosis: Review of anatomic distribution and mechanisms
Abstract
Endometriosis (EM) is an infrequent cause of peripheral neuropathy, most commonly sciatic. Perineural spread has recently been introduced as an alternate explanation for cases of lumbosacral or sciatic nerve EM. We performed a literature review to collect all reported cases of peripheral and central nervous system EM in search of anatomic patterns of involvement; potentially to support the perineural spread theory. If available, intraneural invasion and presence of peritoneal EM were recorded. The search revealed 83 articles describing 365 cases of somatic peripheral nervous EM and 13 cases of central nervous EM. The most frequently involved site was the sacral plexus (57%, n = 211), followed by the sciatic nerve (39%, n = 140). Other nerves were reported in significantly smaller numbers. Ninety seven percent (97%, n = 355) of peripheral nerve cases presented with pain, 20% (n = 72) reported weakness and 31% (n = 114), numbness. Thirty four percent (34%, n = 38) had solely intraneural EM of which 89% (n = 33) had no peritoneal EM (percentage based on available information). In the central nervous system, the conus medullaris and/or cauda equina constituted the majority of cases with 54% (n = 7). Apart from perineural spread, other discussed mechanisms include retrograde menstruation with peritoneal seeding, hematogenous and lymphogenous spread, stem cell implantation either hematogenously or via retrograde menstruation with subsequent EM differentiation, and coelomic or Müllerian duct metaplasia. We believe this literature review supports perineural spread as an alternate mechanism for EM of nerve, particularly the subgroup with intraneural EM and without peritoneal disease.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Adenomyosis externa lesions occasionally invade nerves and have some neurotropic effect.
“These adenomyosis externa lesions occasionally invade nerves (14) and have some neurotropic effect (15,16).”
From Pathogenesis of deep endometriosis (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 120 · Cited by 77
- Authors
- Siquara De Sousa, A. C., Capek, S., Amrami, K. K., & Spinner, R. J.
- Affiliations
- Department of Neurosurgery Mayo Clinic Rochester Minnesota
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- Corresponding author
- Spinner, Robert J.
- Venue
- Clinical Anatomy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-09-09
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1029-1038
- ISSN
- 0897-3806 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2353
- OpenAlex
- W2164255707
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 120
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 1.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Anatomy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Medical Case Reports and Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant and fungal interactions
- Keywords
- endometriosis, sciatic nerve, sacral plexus, perineural spread, cauda equina, conus medullaris, retrograde menstruation, hematogenous spread, stem cell transplantation, endometriosis-associated pain
- MeSH terms
- Cauda Equina, Central Nervous System Diseases, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Hypesthesia, Lumbosacral Plexus, Pain, Peripheral Nervous System Diseases, Sciatic Nerve, Spinal Cord, Muscle Weakness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review