Re: Cervical Stenosis
From: anonymous@obgyn.net
Tue Jan 27 09:01:02 2009
I have been having several issues related to cervical stenosis going on
for over 2 years. All of these issues might have been preventable had I
gone to my annual exams like the good patient should, however the end
result is I now have a beautiful daughter that I may not have been
blessed with so there is no use in going into the could-of should-of
aspect of this.
We found out I was pregnant August of 2006 and when I went to my first
prenatal visit they performed a routine pap. Of course it came back
abnormal. I went through the biopsy and it came back carcinoma in situ.
After my daughter was born I had a cone biopsy done to remove the areas
affected in my cervix. I went to my first follow up and everything
looked great and came back normal. That's when I decided all is well
and went on with my life. I failed to go back for the 2nd follow-up. I
went 15 months with no period and I thought that since I was
breast-feeding that I was simply not menstruating due to that. WRONG!!
I was menstruating, however I had complete cervical stenosis and
therefore was bleeding back into the uterus, fallopian tubes, ovaries,
and then internal pelvic region and bowels. My system shut down
completely and I was having episodes of severe abdominal pain on one
side of the other. I finally went to the ER to discover this. And
because of the bleeding, I now developed severe endometriosis. I had a
D & C with a laparoscopy in July 2008 and the flood gates opened so to
speak. Unfortunately, the damage is done and I have stopped
menstruating again. I now am scheduled for a complete hysterectomy for
Feb 12, my birthday!! I understand that this may seem like a severe
case, however it can happen if you wait too long to seek medical
attention for abnormal menstruation. Please Please Please seek a
doctor's intervention before this happens to you.
At Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Sudsey wrote:
>
>I was reading up on it and hystericaly at first came up with more spinal
>stenosis info then the right kind which I would assume you probably did
>too.. Anyway not sure if this will help at all or not but this is some
>of the information I ran across on various sites. It seems they talk
>about what it is more then how to treat it so I can see how that's not
>answering your questions too well..
>
>It can happen with any surgery performed on the cervix and is caused by
>improper healing of the tissues after a procedure. A risk associated
>with surgeries done on the cervix is narrowing or total closing of the
>canal of the cervix. Cervical stenosis is not related to cervical
>cancer or cryotherapy, which is a treatment for pre-cervical cancer.
>
>Stenosis refers to a "stiffening" of muscles; therefore, in cases of
>cervical stenosis, the already very constricted muscles that hold a
>woman's cervix closed (very important, obviously, during pregnancy) may
>not dilate (open) in a normal fashion.
>
>Cervical stenosis is more common after a LEEP procedure than after
>cryotherapy. This problem occurs more often in women over the age of
>40, but can still take place in younger women. It results in
>infertility and if it blocks menstrual flow there is increased cramping
>during menstruation. Though a serious problem, it is not a common risk.
>Cervical stenosis is more common after a LEEP procedure than after
>cryotherapy
>
>Surgery to remove blockage caused by cervical stenosis is usually done
>in the hospital.
>
>Cervical stenosis can complicate a D&C by creating a false passage in
>the cervical canal, and possibly lead to uterine perforation. I've
>found that insufflation with 32% dextrin 70 in dextrose can ease the
>stenosis.
>
>I'm so very sorry to hear you are dealing with this but from what I've
>read it sounds like there is some sort of surgery to help open the
>cervix now what this surgery is wasn't explained but reading that a D&c
>can complicate it would seriously make me think it's not the proper
>treatment for that aspect of it. I can see that after an extended time
>of build up a D& C might be in order to remove alot of that but there's
>got to be a surgery more in the corrective line for this wouldn't you
>think. A D&C is only treating the complication of the actual problem..
>I'll dig around a little later with this and see if I can find the name
>of the proceedure to it..Can't promise I will find it but I'll
>try..Maybe someone else here already knows that info for you alos. Lets
>hope huh..
>Keep you in my thoughts it sounds painful and no one needs anymore
>added..
>Hugs
>Sudsey
>
>At Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Laura wrote:
>>
>>Does anyone know much about this? I have been doing some research but
>>not getting a lot of answers. I was diagnosed with it about 10 months
>>ago. I went in the hospital 8 months ago for the D&C. Before the D&C,
>>I didn't bleed much during my period which made the pain even worse
>>because it was backing up into my system. The D&C at least triggered
>>semi-normal blood flow. Over the past 3 or 4 months, I am not bleeding
>>much again. My pains and everything else has gotten worse. I would
>>think that going on like this not good for my body. However, I can't
>>imagine having to get another D&C would be so great for my body either.
>>I am not sure what causes the stenosis. Any information that anyone
>>could provide would be greatly appreciated.
![[ endo@obgyn.net ]](../../images/endo_at_obgyn.gif)