Urethral caruncles
Urethral caruncles
12945 2024;26:183–8
The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist
Review
http://onlinetog.org
Urethral caruncles
Naomi Harvey MB BcH BAO BSc (Hons) MRCOG,*a Kathryn Bottrell MBBS BSc,b Esme White MB ChB BC MRCS (Urol),
c
Angela Birnie BSc MBBS FRCS (Urol) MMedEd, FHEA,c Melanie Tipples MBBS MRCOG FRCS(ed)d
a
ST6 Obstetrics & Gynaecology, St Richards Hospital, Chichester PO19 6SE, UK
b
ST1 Obstetrics & Gynaecology, St Richards Hospital, Chichester PO16SE, UK
c
Consultant Urologist, St Richards Hospital, Chichester PO19 6SE, UK
d
Consultant Gynaecologist, St Richards Hospital, Chichester PO19 6SE, UK
*Correspondence: Naomi Harvey. Email: [email protected]
Please cite this paper as: Harvey N, Bottrell K, White E, Birnie A, Tipples M. Urethral caruncles. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 2024;26:183–8. https://doi.org/
10.1111/tog.12945
cancer.19 If indicated, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) treatment with topical estrogens, or where diagnosis is
can aid exclusion of underlying malignancy where they uncertain, for example owing to atypical appearance.22
appear as T2-hyperintense tissue surrounding the external Surgical excision may also be considered for thrombosis,
urethral meatus (Figure 2).20,21 significant or recurrent bleeding or acute urinary retention.24
If there is any suspicion of a malignant pathology, tissue Best practice dictates that excision should be undertaken by a
biopsy of the urethra is advised (Appendix 1). urogynaecologist or a very experienced gynaecologist
or urologist.
The most common method of surgical management is
Management of urethral caruncles
simple excision (Figure 3).2 This is usually performed as a
Conservative management day case procedure, under general anaesthetic, with
Provided there is no concern for malignancy, the majority of placement of a urethral catheter for 48 to 72 hours post-
urethral caruncles can be managed conservatively. operatively. Local practices and surgeon preferences will vary;
Approximately one-third of urethral caruncles are below is an outline of the key principles when undertaking
asymptomatic and these can be managed with no surgical excision of a urethral caruncle.
intervention, depending on patient preference.7 The key surgical steps include:10,23
Prophylactic antibiotic dose in line with local
Medical management hospital guidelines
The mainstay of treatment is with low-dose topical estrogens Cystoscopy followed by placement of a Foley catheter to
with pessaries or topical creams.7,22 The management is often reduce risk of clot retention
complemented with sitz baths and topical non-steroidal anti- Use of stay-sutures in the proximal epithelium to prevent
inflammatories or steroids for additional symptom relief, mucosal retraction and meatal stenosis
though there is limited evidence for their effectiveness. Excision of the lesion
Patients often notice improvement in symptoms within Oversewing the edges with 3-0 or 4-0 absorbable sutures
6 weeks of initiating treatment with topical estrogens, though (e.g. Vicryl)
maximum effect of therapy is 3 to 6 months.23 Trial removal of catheter at 48–72 hours post-operatively
A systematic review of the literature on urethral caruncle An alternative surgical management technique is the
management reveals mainly retrospective case series and ligation method completed under local anaesthetic,
small cohort studies, with no randomised controlled trials to whereby a ligature is placed at the base of the caruncle
date.4 The traditional focus is primarily on surgical excision. allowing it to atrophy and fall off.25 Urethral caruncles can
also be removed by cauterisation and laser vaporisation.
Surgical management of urethral caruncles Potential risks of surgical excision include clot retention
Surgical intervention is rarely required and is largely reserved leading to urinary retention, meatal retraction, stenosis,
for urethral caruncles that remain symptomatic, despite infection, wound breakdown and recurrence. One case series
Figure 2. MRI appearance of a urethral caruncle -axial (left) and sagittal (right) T2-weighted MR images demonstrate a high-signal-intensity cuff
(arrows) surrounding the external urethral meatus. (Reproduced with permission from Siegelman et al.21)
a
Subspeciality Trainee in Gynae-Oncology, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK
b
Speciality Trainee in Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK
c
Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist and Endometriosis Specialist, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK
d
Consultant Subspecialist in Gynaecological Oncology, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK
*Correspondence: Rosie Campbell. Email: [email protected]
Please cite this paper as: Campbell R, Milford K, Peyton-Jones B, Hannemann M. Endometriosis as a risk factor for ovarian cancer: an update on screening, risk
reduction, treatment and prognosis. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 2024;26:189–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/tog.12948
gene mutation would see their risk of ovarian cancer rise These mutations result in the loss of BAF250a protein
from 39–44% to 40.2–45.2% owing to endometriosis.10 expression, a key component utilised by the SWItch/Sucrose
Conversely, a person without other predisposing risk factors, Non-Fermentable (SWI-SNF) complex. The SWI-SNF
except for endometriosis, would experience an increase in complex, functioning as an epigenetic regulator, plays a
their risk from 2% to 3.2%. This highlights the need for vital role in DNA transcription and repair and chromatin
continued research into the complex relationship between the substrate facilitation. Other common mutations found
two conditions and to equip clinicians with the most up- in both endometriosis and EAOC include phosphatase
to-date evidence in order to provide informed counselling to and tensin homolog (PTEN ), phosphatidylinositol-
individuals with endometriosis.5,6 4,5-biphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PI3KCA),
catenin beta-1 (CTNNB1), Kirstin rat sarcoma virus (KRAS ),
tumour protein 53 (TP53), protein phosphatase 2 scaffold
Pathophysiology of EAOC
subunit Aalpha (PPP2R1A), AT-rich interaction domain 1B
The pathophysiological mechanism leading to EAOC is still (ARID1B) and phosphoinositide-3-kinase regulatory subunit
an ongoing topic of research. Despite the lack of a definitive 1 (PI3K3R1). Figure 2 outlines the reported frequencies of
answer, emerging evidence suggests that the relationship is these tumour suppressor gene mutations found in EAOC
causal, not correlative.11-13 Proposed mechanisms for and endometriosis.13,15
malignant change include chronic inflammation, The PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is an extensively studied
hyperestrogenism and oxidative stress.11,14 cellular mechanism in oncology. It is an intracellular signalling
Recent studies have uncovered a significant association pathway that regulates the cell cycle and suppresses apoptosis.
between specific mutations in tumour suppressor genes and In many cancers, this pathway is overstimulated, reducing
the development of EAOC. Notably, the AT-rich interaction apoptosis and the proliferation of neoplastic cells.16 Many
domain 1A (ARID1A) gene, which is present in factors can stimulate the pathway, including the loss of PTEN
approximately 20% of human cancers and is crucial for expression, which is observed in EAOC.12,13
DNA repair and chromatin remodelling, frequently exhibits
mutations in both endometriosis and EAOC (refer to
Risk
Figure 1 for a simplified molecular mechanism).2,11-13,15
It is now accepted that endometriosis is a risk factor for EOC.
Multiple studies have shown an association between the two
conditions.3,4,17-10 Our literature search identified three
BAF250a SWI-SNF meta-analyses quantifying the risk of EAOC.4,17,19 In 2014,
ARID1A Kim et al. found a statistically significant association between
endometriosis and EOC (RR 1.265, 95% CI 1.214–1.318).4
BAF250a/SWI-SNF complex
has roles in:
They also found that those with EAOC were twice as likely to
• epigenetic regulation present with earlier stage disease (stage I-II) when compared
• DNA transcription with non-EAOC (RR 1.959, 95% CI 1.367–2.807). Further
• DNA repair BAF250a
• chromatin substrate subgroup analysis showed that grade 1 disease was more
facilitation
SWI-SNF
common in EAOC (RR 1.319, 95% CI 1.367–2.807);
however, the likelihood of achieving optimal debulking
surgery was no different between EAOC and non-EAOCs
(RR 1.403, 95% CI 0.915–2.152). Wang et al. in 2016 also
found endometriosis to be a significant risk factor for EOC
BAF250a
(OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.28–1.57).17 More recently, in 2021,
SWI-SNF
Kvaskoff et al.19 had similar findings: endometriosis doubled
ARID1A a woman’s risk of EOC (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.68–2.22); for
CCC, the risk tripled (RR 3.44, 95% CI 2.82–4.42) and it
Mutations in the tumour
suppressor gene ARID1A
doubled for EC (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.82–2.98). It is
(found in endometriosis noteworthy that none of these meta-analyses considered the
and EAOC) leads to a loss BAF250a severity of endometriosis in their analysis. A large cohort
of expression of BAF250a,
resulting in an impaired study by Saavalainen et al. addressed this gap by assessing the
BAF250a/SWI-SNF SWI-SNF risk of EAOC in various forms of surgically confirmed
complex
endometriosis, including peritoneal, ovarian and deep
endometriosis.20 The findings indicated that only ovarian
Figure 1. Simplified molecular expression of ARID1A gene. endometriosis significantly increased the overall risk of EOC
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
ARID1A PIK3CA CTNNB1 PTEN KRAS TP5 PPP3R1A ARID1B PIK3R1
Figure 2. Comparison of reported gene mutation frequencies in CCC, EC and ovarian endometriosis. CCC = clear cell carcinoma; EC = endometrial
cancer.
Table 1. Overview of risk ration (RR) and odds ratio (OR) associated with endometriosis-associated ovarian cancer.
Risk Reference
(RR 2.46, 95% CI 1.98–3.27). There was no significant Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening
association with peritoneal (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99–1.72) or (UKCTOCS) was a randomised controlled trial that screened
deep endometriosis (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.29–4.10). When the general population with multimodal screening. They used
considering histological subtypes, both peritoneal and serial CA-125 and transvaginal ultrasound (TV USS) as a
ovarian endometriosis were found to increase the risk of secondary test in conjunction with the risk of ovarian cancer
EC (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.05–3.54) and CCC (RR 4.72, 95%CI algorithm (ROCA) and showed high sensitivity and
2.75–7.56), respectively. Notably, for CCC, only ovarian specificity. They also found significantly more low-volume
endometriosis emerged as a significant risk factor (RR 10.1; disease compared with unscreened controls. The results of
95%CI 5.50–16.9). Table 1 outlines the associated RR and OR the trial were encouraging; however, they failed to find a
for different variations of endometriosis. mortality benefit, so it has not been implemented as
a screening programme.21-23 A sister trial, the United
Kingdom Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial
Screening and surveillance
(UKFOCS), investigated the effectiveness of screening
Currently, there exists no national screening programme for high-risk individuals. They conducted a prospective
the general female population for ovarian cancer. The United multi-cohort screening study on those with a 10% or
Table 2. Associated risk reduction of epithelial ovarian cancer in those with endometriosis
EC CCC Reference
Tubal ligation RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.43–0.69) RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.39–0.77) Gaitskell et al.27
RR 0.40 (95% CI 0.30–0.53) Cibula et al.28
Deep excisional surgery All EOC*: OR 0.37 (95% CI 0.25–0.55) Melin et al.32
greater lifetime risk of OC. Their findings were also 40–45 years old, respectively.25 Lynch syndrome carriers are
encouraging, showing that screening the high-risk offered RRS (hysterectomy + BSO) depending on their
population resulted in a significant shift in the stage of mismatch repair (MMR) status, but this can be at as young as
disease when detected; however, the study was unable to 35 years old.26 Currently, there exists no national guidance
demonstrate long-term morbidity and mortality benefits.24 on offering RRS to those with endometriosis. However,
Until now, there hasn’t been any trial dedicated to screening evidence suggests the EAOC subtypes may benefit most from
women and people with endometriosis for early detection of both surgical and medical methods. Table 2 summarises the
EAOC. Considering that such screening hasn’t demonstrated risk reductions of EOC with various therapies.
improved mortality in other at-risk groups, its potential
benefits for individuals with endometriosis appear unlikely. Tubal ligation
The ESHRE endometriosis guideline highlights the It is well documented that tubal ligation (salpingectomy and
detrimental effects of false-positive screenings, noting not occlusive methods) can reduce the risk of EOC.27-29 In 2016, a
only the psychological impact but also the physical harm prospective study by Gaitskell et al.27 found that risk reduction
caused by unnecessary interventions.7 of EOC via tubal ligation varied significantly according to the
histological subtype. The following relative risk of EOC
following tubal ligation was found according to histological
Risk reduction strategies
subtype: high-grade serous (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67–0.89),
Individuals with a genetic predisposition for ovarian cancer low-grade serous/borderline tumours (RR 1.13, 95% CI
are offered risk-reducing surgery (RRS) once their families 0.89–1.42), EC (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.43–0.69), CCC (RR 0.55,
are complete. This usually takes the form of a bilateral 95% CI 0.39–0.77) and mucinous (RR 0.99, 95% CI
salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) or can include a 0.84–1.18).27 A meta-analysis performed by Cibula et al. also
hysterectomy. For those with BRCA1, the lifetime risk of found a variation in RR following tubal ligation according to
ovarian cancer is 39–44 in 100 and BRCA2 11–17 in 100, so histological subtype.28 They also found the most significant risk
therefore studies advise BSO from 35–40 years old and reduction in EC (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30–0.53); however, they