

<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpublishing3.dtd">

<article xmlns:xlink="https://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">J Reprod Infert</journal-id>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">arij001</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Journal of Reproduction &amp; Infertility</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="ppub">2228-5482</issn>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2251-676X</issn>
      <publisher>
        <publisher-name>Avicenna Research Institute</publisher-name>
      </publisher>
    </journal-meta>

    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">jri140269</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi"></article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="pmid"></article-id>
      <article-categories>
        <subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
             <subject></subject> 
        </subj-group>
        <subj-group>
            <subject></subject>
        </subj-group> 
      </article-categories>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Accessory Cavitated Uterine Mass: A Diagnostic Dilemma Illustrated by Three Case Reports</article-title>
      </title-group>
        <contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Thakur</surname><given-names>Shruti</given-names></name></contrib><aff>Department of Radiodiagnosis, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital (IGMC), Shimla, India</aff></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>Sanjay</given-names></name></contrib><aff>Department of Radiodiagnosis, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital (IGMC), Shimla, India</aff></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Makhaik</surname><given-names>Sushma</given-names></name></contrib><aff>Department of Radiodiagnosis, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital (IGMC), Shimla, India</aff></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Aggarwal</surname><given-names>Neeti</given-names></name></contrib><aff>Department of Radiodiagnosis, Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital (IGMC), Shimla, India</aff></contrib-group>
      <pub-date pub-type="ppub">
        <day></day>
        <month></month>
        <year></year>
      </pub-date>
      <pub-date pub-type="epub">
        <day></day>
        <month></month>
        <year></year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>26</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>131</fpage>
      <lpage>138</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received">
          <day>12</day>
          <month>2</month>
          <year>2025</year>
        </date>
        <date date-type="accepted">
          <day>7</day>
          <month>6</month>
          <year>2025</year>
        </date>
      </history>
      <abstract>
      <p>
      &lt;p&gt;Background: Accessory cavitated uterine mass (ACUM) is a rare, unclassified M&amp;uuml;llerian anomaly characterized by distinct imaging features. It is typically lo-cated within the uterus, close to the round ligament, and has a uterus-like struc-tural arrangement. The patient may present with pelvic pain or dysmenorrhea. Most of these cases are misdiagnosed because of a lack of awareness about this unusual entity.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
Case Presentation: Three cases of ACUM in young patients who experienced prolonged symptoms and had incomplete family structures were reported in this paper. Initially, two of these cases were misdiagnosed during ultrasound exami-nations (USG). The subsequent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed characteristic imaging features consistent with ACUM, which provided signifi-cant psychological relief to both the patients and their families. Two patients re-ceived hormonal therapy, both of whom were unmarried. The third patient, however, indicated a wish to conceive and was therefore initiated on analgesics. All three patients chose to forgo surgical intervention, opting instead for medi-cal management despite its limited success in alleviating their symptoms. This decision was made to minimize obstetric risks associated with surgical interven-tions in potential future pregnancies.&lt;br /&gt;
Conclusion: Laparoscopy or open surgery is the mainstay treatment for a per-manent relief from the symptoms. However, surgical treatment should be of-fered with caution as no data are available in medical literature regarding the ef-fect of surgically induced myometrial scarring on patients&amp;rsquo; reproductive out-comes. Since most of these patients were young and nulligravida, the therapy had to be personalized in accordance with the patient&amp;rsquo;s preference and family status.&lt;/p&gt;

      </p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>

    
</article>

