Cited by 35Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsEctopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management

Clinical presentation of endometriosis identified at interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization: Prospective series of 465 cases

Tissot, M., Lecointre, L., Faller, E., Afors, K., Akladios, C., Audebert, A.·2017·Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction

Abstract

Objectives Women seeking sterilization are usually parous and have no major complains, such as pelvic pain. This could be a good model to indirectly assess the prevalence of endometriosis in the general population. Prevalence of endometriosis in women undergoing tubal sterilization by laparoscopy has been assessed in 17 published reports. Results indicate a surprising wide variation of prevalence of endometriosis, ranging from 1.4% to 43.3%. This clinical study describes the prevalence and clinical presentations of endometriosis identified at interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization, as a close representation of endometriosis in general population. Material and methods From July 1989 to February 2009, 465 women undergone interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization and were included in this series. Surgery was realised in a non universitary centre of gynecologic surgery. All patients were operated on by the same surgeon. A complete assessement of pelvic organs was achieved with a particular attention paid for endometriotic lesions. Endometriosis when present was staged according to r-AFS classification. Biopsies were sent for pathological examination to assess endometriosis. Results Mean age of women was 40.7 years (range 15-49 years). 20 women were nulliparous and 12 others had a past history of endometriosis. Endometriosis was visually identified in 55 patients (11.82%), and confirmed by histologic examination in most of cases (50/55: 90.9%). The mean age of women presenting endometriosis at the onset of tubal ligation was 41.27 years. Cases with endometriosis were classified according to the r-AFS. 39,7,8 and 1 cases corresponded to stages I, II, III and IV respectively. In the 20 nulliparous women, the prevalence of endometriosis was 20% (4/20). At the time of laparoscopic sterilization, 91 women presented a painfull condition (dysmenorrhea mainly or dyspareunia). Endometriosis was identified in 16 of them (17.58%). In the group of 360 asymptomatic parous women, the prevalence of endometriosis was 10% (36/360). Nulliparity, associated pelvic pain and retroverted uterus were associated with increased prevalence of endometriosis, without being significant. Conclusion In our study, the prevalence of endometriosis identified at interval laparoscopic tubal sterilization was 11.82%. In parous asymptomatic women, the prevalence of endometriosis was 10%. The prevalence of endometriosis was slightly increased in nulliparous women, when pain was associated and in women with a retroverted uterus.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jogoh.2017.05.003

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Studies looking for asymptomatic endometriosis among women undergoing tubal ligation yielded rates of endometriosis centering around 19%.

    “These studies yielded rates of endometriosis that center around 19% (Barbosa et al., 2009; Rawson, 1991; Tissot et al., 2017).”

    From Endometriosis and polycystic ovary syndrome are diametric disorders (2021) · cites this paper as Tissot et al., 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tissot, M., Lecointre, L., Faller, E., Afors, K., Akladios, C., & Audebert, A.
Affiliations
  • Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg (FR)
  • Hôpital d'Hautepierre (FR)
  • Institut de Recherche contre les Cancers de l’Appareil Digestif (FR)
Corresponding author
Tissot, M.
Venue
Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-10
Volume
46
Issue
8
Pages
647-650
ISSN
2468-7847 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2614399315
Cited by
35
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5
FWCI
2.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
endometriosis, laparoscopic sterilization, endometriosis prevalence, endometriosis staging, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, nulliparous women, parous women, pelvic pain, endometriosis detection
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Parity, Laparoscopy, Prospective Studies, Sterilization, Tubal, Prevalence, Pelvic Pain, Incidental Findings, Young Adult, Asymptomatic Diseases, Uterine Retroversion

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