子宫肌壁间妊娠误诊为妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤1例并相关文献分析
Intermural Pregnancy Was Misdiagnosed as Gestational Trophoblastic Tumor: A Case Report and Related Literature Analysis
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.13112411, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 200  浏览: 261 
作者: 张凯丽, 贺天娇:青岛大学医学部,山东 青岛;张华玲, 车艳辞*:青岛大学附属医院妇科,山东 青岛
关键词: 异位妊娠误诊妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤Ectopic Pregnancy Misdiagnosis Gestational Trophoblastic Disease
摘要: 子宫肌壁间妊娠(intramural pregnancy, IMP)是极为罕见的异位妊娠部位之一,发病率 < 1%,指受精卵完全被子宫肌层包围,与子宫腔及输卵管均不相通。子宫肌壁间妊娠早期诊断困难,若延误治疗可导致子宫破裂、失血性休克甚至切除子宫而丧失生育功能。目前尚缺乏相关指南,国内外文献仅报道相关个案,与其他部位异位妊娠、妊娠滋养细胞疾病、变性肌瘤等难以鉴别。近年来随着辅助生殖技术、宫腔操作史、既往子宫手术史发生率的升高,IMP的发生率也逐渐提高,临床上对该病警惕性不足,提高对该病的认识有助于早期诊断,本文报道1例青岛大学附属医院诊治为IMP的临床罕见病例,并复习相关文献资料,旨在提高对该病的认识,并为其诊治提供参考。
Abstract: Intramural pregnancy (IMP) is one of the very rare ectopic pregnancy sites, with an incidence of <1%, in which the fertilized egg is completely surrounded by the myotome of the uterus and does not communicate with the uterine cavity and fallopian tubes. Early diagnosis of intramural preg-nancy is difficult, and delayed treatment may lead to uterine rupture, hemorrhagic shock, or even hysterectomy and loss of reproductive function. At present, there is a lack of relevant guidelines, and only related cases have been reported in domestic and foreign literatures, which are difficult to distinguish from other parts of ectopic pregnancy, gestational trophoblastic disease, and degenera-tive myoma. In recent years, with the increasing incidence of assisted reproductive technology, uterine operation history, and previous uterine operation history, the incidence of IMP has also gradually increased. Clinical vigilance of the disease is insufficient, and improving the understand-ing of the disease is helpful for early diagnosis. This paper reports a rare clinical case of IMP diag-nosed and diagnosed in the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, and reviews the relevant lit-erature. The aim is to improve the understanding of the disease and provide reference for its diag-nosis and treatment.
文章引用:张凯丽, 贺天娇, 张华玲, 车艳辞. 子宫肌壁间妊娠误诊为妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤1例并相关文献分析[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(11): 17199-17202. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.13112411

1. 病例介绍

44岁已婚已孕患者,G2P1,顺产1次,因“停经87天,阴道流血50余天”入院。患者平素月经规律,4/30天,末次月经:2022-07-12,经量中等,无痛经史。患者在停经35天时出现大量阴道流血,量同既往月经量3倍,伴大量血凝块,2天后阴道流血减少,量同既往月经量1/2,未予处理。患者停经55天于外院查血人绒毛膜促性腺激素(HCG):7932 mU/mL,血红蛋白:90 g/l,经阴彩超提示:宫底部异常高回声,首次诊断为妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤,于当地医院接受了肌肉注射甲氨蝶呤5天,剂量不详,后出院。

出院后于2022-09-26初次就诊我院,后行连续超声和HCG水平检查,检测定量HCG水平逐渐下降(从11180 mU/mL降至206.9 mU/mL),多次复查经阴彩超声提示左侧宫角区见2.7*2.4 cm不均质回声团,边界欠清,内见蜂窝状无回声,周边血流信号丰富。胸部CT未见异常,考虑异位妊娠可能性大,与患者充分沟通后,于我院行腹腔镜 + 宫腔镜检查,术中见:宫腔形态正常,宫腔左后壁近宫角处略突出,表面充血,未见妊娠组织,宫腔下段见倒置T型节育器,完整取出宫内节育器后,切开左后壁突起处,见陈旧坏死组织。宫腔镜透光试验再次确认左侧宫角后壁肌层薄弱。腹腔镜下见子宫左侧宫角稍膨出,后壁明显,表面血供丰富,双侧卵巢及右侧输卵管未见明显异常,盆腔内未见明显液体,切开左侧宫角部,完整切除妊娠组织及部分宫角部肌层,术后病理结果提示:部分平滑肌组织内见退变的绒毛及滋养叶细胞。

患者术后恢复良好,术后10天复查血HCG恢复正常,电话随访术后1月月经恢复正常。

2. 讨论

2.1. 疾病概述

IMP的发病机制尚不清楚,一般认为受精卵通过内膜或浆膜上微小的裂隙或子宫瘢痕进入子宫肌层,或随着子宫内膜窦道植入子宫肌层 [1] 。目前考虑其发生与子宫内膜缺陷、子宫浆膜层破损、子宫炎症、子宫腺肌症、胚胎移植过程等因素相关 [2] 。本病例患者既往宫腔操作史且宫内节育器崁顿是目前可识别的高危因素。IMP临床表现缺乏特异性,多表现为停经后阴道流血或轻微腹痛,甚至无明显症状。早期极易误诊,破裂后更难诊断。阴道流血程度可能与孕囊距离子宫内膜及浆膜面的距离相关,目前大部分文献报道未清楚描述相关内容,缺乏数据 [3] 。目前经阴道超声仍然可作为诊断的首选检查 [4] 。根据超声表现可分为孕囊型、包块型和破裂型 [5] 。超声检查与MRI结合更有助于作出准确诊断,并排除其他诊断可能性。MRI在显示病灶位置、侵入肌层深度和周围组织关系上有更加明显的优势 [6] [7] 。MRI可以显现出异位妊娠独有的残余胎儿胎盘组织中具有绒毛结构的纤维蛋白链,便于早期做出准确诊断 [8] 。

2.2. 鉴别诊断

肌壁间妊娠早期诊断困难,与妊娠滋养细胞疾病、其他特殊类型的异位妊娠难以鉴别,阅读相关文献整理有关内容。

2.2.1. 妊娠滋养细胞疾病

妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤是一组与妊娠相关的恶性肿瘤,包括侵蚀性葡萄胎、绒毛膜癌、胎盘部位滋养细胞肿瘤和上皮性滋养细胞肿瘤。其超声声像图上子宫肌层可见高回声团或内有回声不均区域或团块,也可伴不规则低回声或无回声,超声主要显示为丰富的血流信号和低阻力型血流频谱。包块型肌壁间妊娠超声主要以混合回声为主,内见不规则无回声区,周边肌层血管丰富,血管扩张。可见丰富血流信号,部分可检测到典型滋养层血流 [5] [9] 。其易与滋养细胞肿瘤侵犯周边肌层形成的动静脉瘘图像混淆。但滋养细胞肿瘤患者血HCG常异常升高,较正常妊娠或异位妊娠时血HCG的数倍甚至几十倍,且多发生于葡萄胎、流产、异位妊娠、足月产后,并很早可通过血行转移至全身。血HCG异常升高是诊断妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的主要诊断依据。本例患者血HCG逐渐下降,连续超声提示宫角部异常回声,肺CT未见明显异常,不支持妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤。

2.2.2. 其他特殊类型的异位妊娠

主要靠影像学诊断与其他类型的异位妊娠相鉴别。子宫间质输卵管妊娠超声图像显示横截面肿块为明显凸出,未靠近子宫底 [4] ,间质线被妊娠中断。然而,当壁内妊娠位于间质管附近时,间质线被妊娠移位,呈现弯曲和拉长 [10] 。壁内妊娠的彩色多普勒超声通常显示壁间妊娠包块周围的子宫肌层血管丰富,血管扩张,而宫角妊娠妊娠囊附着于子宫内膜,无此现象,必要时可在超声引导下使用探针进行探查。如果探针能触及孕囊,则提示宫角妊娠。如果没有,应高度怀疑壁内妊娠 [4] 。

2.3. 误诊原因分析

首先该疾病临床少见,临床表现缺乏特异性,仅仅依靠超声图像和血HCG结果与其他疾病鉴别困难。其次首诊医师缺乏对罕见病的认识,未详细询问患者病情,且盲目相信超声诊断,从而未全面分析患者病情,草率下诊断。影像学医师未认真分析包块周围声像图情况,影像学医师应提高对该疾病的诊断水平,影像图像应显示出子宫内膜–子宫肌层交界处,更好判断出孕囊与肌层、内膜的关系,当超声诊断困难时,应结合MRI等其他相关检查与其他疾病相鉴别,便于早期做出准确诊断,避免延误病情给患者造成不可挽救的损失。

2.4. 治疗方式

子宫肌壁间妊娠目前没有单一的通用治疗方式,主要包括保守治疗、子宫动脉栓塞及手术治疗 [2] 。若患者病情稳定及早期诊断,可药物治疗 [11] ,根据最新研究数据表明:保守治疗是完全性壁内妊娠的首选选择 [10] ,倾向于局部注射甲氨蝶呤并严格遵守随访。但药物治疗具有治疗不彻底可能,甚至保守失败最终仍需手术可能。近年来,因IMP继发的子宫破裂及失血性休克的发生率降低,手术方式主要以损伤小、恢复快的腹腔镜和宫腔镜手术为主。对于发现妊娠囊通过窦道与宫腔相连的IMP或需要排除宫角妊娠的病例,首选宫腔镜手术 [12] 。腹腔镜手术不仅便于早期诊断,更是安全有效的治疗方法。本病例同时应用了宫腔镜和腹腔镜,手术效果好,治疗效果佳。

3. 结论

肌壁间妊娠为少见的特殊类型异位妊娠,应提高对该疾病的认识,对于伴有已知风险因素的患者应尽早诊断,诊治不及时造成的误诊、漏诊对患者身心造成不利影响。经阴道超声起着关键作用,必要时可行MRI等相关检查增加诊断的准确性。诊断和治疗应充分考虑着床部位、子宫肌层受累程度、诊断时的胎龄、生存能力以及患者保留妊娠和未来生育能力的意愿 [13] ,因人而异,具体分析。

参考文献

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Bannon, K., Fernandez, C., Rojas, D., et al. (2013) Diagnosis and Management of Intramural Ectopic Pregnancy. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 20, 697-700.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2013.02.023
[2] Bernstein, H.B., Thrall, M.M. and Clark, W.B. (2001) Expectant Management of Intramural Ectopic Pregnancy. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 97, 826-827.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-200105000-00046
[3] 李琳, 成九梅, 陈超, 等. 子宫肌壁间妊娠的早期识别及临床诊疗策略[J]. 北京医学, 2020, 42(11): 1124-1126+1131.
[4] Liu, N.-N., Han, X.-S., Guo, X.-J., et al. (2017) Ultrasound Diagnosis of Intramural Pregnancy. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 43, 1071-1075.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13322
[5] 郑琼, 李胜利, 官勇, 等. 子宫肌壁间妊娠超声诊断分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2014, 11(11): 904-910.
[6] Ko, H.S., Lee, Y., Lee, H.J., et al. (2006) So-nographic and MR Findings in 2 Cases of Intramural Pregnancy Treated Conservatively. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound, 34, 356-360.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20245
[7] Gopireddy, D.R., Le, R., Virarkar, M.K., et al. (2021) Mag-netic Resonance Imaging Evaluation of Ectopic Pregnancy: A Value-Added Review. Journal of Computer Assisted To-mography, 45, 374-382.
https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000001148
[8] Nijjar, S., Bottomley, C., Jauniaux, E., et al. (2023) Imaging in Gynecological Disease: Clinical and Ultrasound Characteristics of Intramural Pregnancy. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 62, 279-289.
https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.26219
[9] Shen, Z., Liu, C., Zhao, L., et al. (2020) Minimally-Invasive Management of Intramural Ectopic Pregnancy: An Eight-Case Series and Literature Review. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gyne-cology and Reproductive Biology, 253, 180-186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.08.021
[10] Kucera, E., Helbich, T., Sliutz, G., et al. (2000) The Modern Management of Interstitial or Intramural Pregnancy Is MRI and “Al-loyed” Diagnostic Gold Standard or the Real Thing? Fertility and Sterility, 73, 1063-1064.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00613-5
[11] Kampioni, M., Chmaj-Wierzchowska, K., Wszołek, K., et al. (2023) Interstitial Ectopic Pregnancy—Case Reports and Medical Management. Medicina, 59, 233.
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59020233
[12] Truong, D.P., Pham, T.H., Nguyen, P.N., et al. (2022) Misdiagno-sis of Intramural Ectopic Pregnancy and Invasive Gestational Trophoblastic Disease on Ultrasound: A Challenging Case at Tu Du Hospital in Vietnam in COVID-19 Pandemic Peak and Mini-Review of Literature. Radiology Case Reports, 17, 4821-4827.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radcr.2022.09.034
[13] Vagg, D., Arsala, L., Kathurusinghe, S., et al. (2018) Intramural Ectopic Pregnancy Following Myomectomy. Journal of Investigative Medicine High Impact Case Reports, 6, 1-4.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2324709618790605