4.4 Review

Prevalence of adenomyosis in endometrial cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS
Volume 303, Issue 1, Pages 47-53

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05840-8

Keywords

Endometrium; Myometrium; Tumor; Malignancy; Gynecology; Oncology

Funding

  1. Alma Mater Studiorum Universita di Bologna within the CRUI-CARE Agreement

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Analysis of eight retrospective cohort studies including 5573 EC patients found a prevalence of adenomyosis in EC patients at 22.6%, which was not significantly different from 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 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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available