Cited by 41Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsDermatologic Treatments and Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Scar Endometriosis in the Abdominal Wall: a Predictable Condition for Experienced Surgeons

Akbulut, S., Mahsuni Sevinc, M., Bakir, S., Cakabay, B., Sezgin, A.·2010·Acta Chirurgica Belgica

Abstract

PURPOSE: Endometriosis in surgical scars develops in 0.1% of those women who undergo Caesarean section or other obstetric surgery. Herein we analyse and discuss the clinico-pathological characteristics of 15 patients with scar endometriosis in the abdominal wall. METHODS: Fifteen cases of scar endometriosis in the abdominal wall that were treated surgically in our department between 2003 and 2009 were examined retrospectively. Age, parity, complaint, medical or surgical history, pre/postoperative hormonotherapy, size of the mass, surgical procedure, follow-up and disease recurrence were analysed. RESULTS: This retrospective study included 15 patients presenting with 17 postoperative abdominal wall masses. The mean age of the patients was 32.1 +/- 6.0 years (range, 23-48). Eleven of the patients had a painful mass that became bigger before menstruation, two had palpable masses only, and two were hospitalised because of a mass with persistent pain. The locations of the masses were as follows: eight were close to the right side and three were close to the left side; two were in the middle of the Pfanenstiel incision and two were in trocar tracts. The patients' surgical histories included Caesarean section in thirteen, bilateral laparoscopic ovarian cyst excision in one, and laparoscopic appendectomy in one. CONCLUSIONS: If a patient presents with incision pain and a palpable mass after gynaecologic surgery, an incisional endometrioma should be considered. Surgical excision and hormone therapy are effective treatment approaches in these patients.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00015458.2010.11680621

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 41

Metadata

Authors
Akbulut, S., Mahsuni Sevinc, M., Bakir, S., Cakabay, B., & Sezgin, A.
Affiliations
  • Diyarbakır Gazi Yaşargil Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi (TR)
  • Department of Surgery, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
  • Department of Pathology, Diyarbakir Education and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Venue
Acta Chirurgica Belgica
Published
2010-01
Volume
110
Issue
3
Pages
303-307
ISSN
0001-5458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1559532452
Cited by
41
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta chirurgica Belgica (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 › Dermatology › Dermatologic Treatments and Research
Keywords
scar endometriosis, abdominal wall, cesarean section, surgical excision, hormone therapy, endometriosis recurrence
MeSH terms
Adult, Appendectomy, Buserelin, Cesarean Section, Cicatrix, Contraceptives, Oral, Danazol, Endometriosis, Estrogen Antagonists, Female, Fertility Agents, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Ovarian Cysts, Pain, Postoperative Complications, Retrospective Studies, Surgical Mesh, Abdominal Wall

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