Cited by 82Endometriosis Research and TreatmentGynecological conditions and treatmentsIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions

Diagnosis and Management of Abdominal Wall Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Clinical Recommendations

Rindos, Noah B., Mansuria, Suketu·2017·Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey

Abstract

Importance: Abdominal wall endometriosis (AWE) is a rare but easily treated cause of pain in women, especially those who have undergone cesarean deliveries. Objective: This article reviews the diagnosis and management of AWE, a condition that generally develops after surgery but may arise spontaneously. We present a systematic review of the existing literature on AWE, as well as our clinical recommendations for medical and surgical management. Evidence Acquisition: We searched PubMed and other databases using the search criteria “abdominal wall endometriosis,” “abdominal wall endometriomas,” and “abdominal wall mass.” The references of those articles were then reviewed, and additional publications were evaluated. Results: Many case reports and case series have been published describing AWE. The overall quality of evidence is poor due to the lack of prospective studies and heterogeneous descriptions of AWE lesions and treatment options. Based on the available literature, it appears that AWE may arise spontaneously but is generally associated with prior pelvic surgery. Abdominal wall endometriosis can be diagnosed with a careful history and physical examination. Imaging including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging can assist with localization of the lesions, and aid in surgical excision and management. Lesions that have been removed in their entirety are unlikely to reoccur. Conclusions and Relevance: Although limited, the body of literature describing management of AWE suggests that it can be successfully treated in most patients with careful surgical planning. Target Audience: Obstetricians and gynecologists, family physicians. Learning Objectives: After completing this activity, the learner should be better able to identify risk factors for abdominal wall endometriosis, counsel their patients on management options, and understand the utility of preoperative imaging.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ogx.0000000000000399

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rindos, N. B., & Mansuria, S.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Rindos, Noah B.
Venue
Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey
Published
2017-02
Volume
72
Issue
2
Pages
116-122
ISSN
  • 0029-7828 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-9866
OpenAlex
W2588698508
Cited by
82
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey (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 › Surgery › Intestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Keywords
abdominal wall endometriosis, endometrioma, cesarean section, postoperative endometriosis, pelvic surgery, surgical excision, recurrence, diagnostic imaging, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, clinical guidelines
MeSH terms
Dissection, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Medical History Taking, Physical Examination, Disease Management, 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