Antonio Raffone1, Renato Seracchioli2, Diego Raimondo3, Manuela Maletta2, Antonio Travaglino4, Ivano Raimondo5,6, Ilaria Giaquinto2, Benedetta Orsini2, Luigi Insabato4, Massimiliano Pellicano1, Fulvio Zullo1. 1. Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Dentistry, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. 2. Gynecology and Human Reproduction Physiopathology, Dipartimento Di Scienze Mediche E Chirurgiche (DIMEC), IRCCS S. Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 3. Gynecology and Human Reproduction Physiopathology, Dipartimento Di Scienze Mediche E Chirurgiche (DIMEC), IRCCS S. Orsola Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. die.raimondo@gmail.com. 4. Pathology Unit, Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. 5. Gynecologic and Obstetric Unit, Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy. 6. School in Biomedical Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Several studies have assessed the histological co-existence of endometrial carcinoma (EC) and adenomyosis. However, the significance of this association is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of adenomyosis in women with EC for a better understanding of the association between the two diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching electronics databases from their inception to March 2020, for all studies that allowed extraction of data about prevalence of adenomyosis in EC patients. Adenomyosis prevalence was calculated for each included study and as pooled estimate, with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies assessing 5573 EC patients were included in our analysis. Of total, 1322 were patients with adenomyosis, and 4251 were patients without adenomyosis. Pooled prevalence of adenomyosis in EC patients was 22.6% (95% CI 12.7-37.1%). CONCLUSION: Adenomyosis prevalence in EC patients was not different from that reported for other gynecological conditions. The supposed association between the two diseases appears unsupported.
INTRODUCTION: Several studies have assessed the histological co-existence of endometrial carcinoma (EC) and adenomyosis. However, the significance of this association is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of adenomyosis in women with EC for a better understanding of the association between the two diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching electronics databases from their inception to March 2020, for all studies that allowed extraction of data about prevalence of adenomyosis in ECpatients. Adenomyosis prevalence was calculated for each included study and as pooled estimate, with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Eight retrospective cohort studies assessing 5573 ECpatients were included in our analysis. Of total, 1322 were patients with adenomyosis, and 4251 were patients without adenomyosis. Pooled prevalence of adenomyosis in ECpatients was 22.6% (95% CI 12.7-37.1%). CONCLUSION:Adenomyosis prevalence in ECpatients was not different from that reported for other gynecological conditions. The supposed association between the two diseases appears unsupported.
Authors: Antonio Raffone; Antonio Travaglino; Angela Santoro; Italia Esposito; Giuseppe Angelico; Saveria Spadola; Gian Franco Zannoni Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Koji Matsuo; Sigita S Cahoon; Marc Gualtieri; Christopher A Scannell; Carrie E Jung; Tadao Takano; Richard J Paulson; Laila I Muderspach; Lynda D Roman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Sharon E Johnatty; Colin J R Stewart; Deborah Smith; Anthony Nguyen; John O' Dwyer; Tracy A O'Mara; Penelope M Webb; Amanda B Spurdle Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-02-27 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Diego Raimondo; Antonio Raffone; Antonio Travaglino; Manuela Maletta; Paolo Casadio; Marco Ambrosio; Anna Chiara Aru; Angela Santoro; Gian Franco Zannoni; Luigi Insabato; Antonio Mollo; Fulvio Zullo; Renato Seracchioli Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2021-07-18 Impact factor: 4.447