Gordts Stephan, Koninckx Philippe, Brosens Ivo
Leuven Institute for Fertility & Embryology, Leuven, Belgium.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catholic University Leuven, University Hospital, Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium; Gruppo Italo Belga, Villa del Rosario and Gemelli Hospitals Università Cattolica, Rome, Italy.
Fertil Steril. 2017 Dec;108(6):872-885.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.08.036. Epub 2017 Oct 31.
The pathophysiology of (deep) endometriosis is still unclear. As originally suggested by Cullen, change the definition "deeper than 5 mm" to "adenomyosis externa." With the discovery of the old European literature on uterine bleeding in 5%-10% of the neonates and histologic evidence that the bleeding represents decidual shedding, it is postulated/hypothesized that endometrial stem/progenitor cells, implanted in the pelvic cavity after birth, may be at the origin of adolescent and even the occasionally premenarcheal pelvic endometriosis. Endometriosis in the adolescent is characterized by angiogenic and hemorrhagic peritoneal and ovarian lesions. The development of deep endometriosis at a later age suggests that deep infiltrating endometriosis is a delayed stage of endometriosis. Another hypothesis is that the endometriotic cell has undergone genetic or epigenetic changes and those specific changes determine the development into deep endometriosis. This is compatible with the hereditary aspects, and with the clonality of deep and cystic ovarian endometriosis. It explains the predisposition and an eventual causal effect by dioxin or radiation. Specific genetic/epigenetic changes could explain the various expressions and thus typical, cystic, and deep endometriosis become three different diseases. Subtle lesions are not a disease until epi(genetic) changes occur. A classification should reflect that deep endometriosis is a specific disease. In conclusion the pathophysiology of deep endometriosis remains debated and the mechanisms of disease progression, as well as the role of genetics and epigenetics in the process, still needs to be unraveled.
(深部)子宫内膜异位症的病理生理学仍不清楚。正如卡伦最初所建议的,将“深度超过5毫米”的定义改为“外在性子宫腺肌病”。随着欧洲古代文献中关于5%-10%新生儿子宫出血的发现以及组织学证据表明这种出血代表蜕膜脱落,推测/假设出生后植入盆腔的子宫内膜干/祖细胞可能是青少年甚至偶尔在初潮前盆腔子宫内膜异位症的起源。青少年子宫内膜异位症的特征是血管生成性和出血性的腹膜及卵巢病变。后期深部子宫内膜异位症的发展表明深部浸润性子宫内膜异位症是子宫内膜异位症的一个延迟阶段。另一种假设是子宫内膜异位细胞发生了基因或表观遗传变化,这些特定变化决定了其发展为深部子宫内膜异位症。这与遗传因素以及深部和囊性卵巢子宫内膜异位症的克隆性相符。它解释了二噁英或辐射的易感性及最终的因果效应。特定的基因/表观遗传变化可以解释各种表现,因此典型、囊性和深部子宫内膜异位症成为三种不同的疾病。在(表观)遗传变化发生之前,细微病变不是一种疾病。一种分类应该反映出深部子宫内膜异位症是一种特定的疾病。总之,深部子宫内膜异位症的病理生理学仍存在争议,疾病进展的机制以及遗传和表观遗传学在这一过程中的作用仍有待阐明。