A rare clinical case of the patient with a hygroma of the pubic symphysis (clinical observation)

Annotation. Timely diagnosis of such a rare pathology as hygroma of the pubic symphysis is an urgent problem, since this disease is not always characterized by typical clinical symptoms and can occur under the guise of many urological and gynecological pathologies.

Purpose of the study: to study the possibility of radiation methods for diagnosing hygroma of the pubic symphysis on the example of clinical observation.

Materials and methods. Patient B., 63 years old, was under observation with a diagnosis of Hygroma of the pubic symphysis. Ultrasound examination was performed on a GE Voluson E10 ultrasound scanner with a RIC5-9-D transvaginal 3D probe (5–10 MHz). Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on a Siemens Magnetom Aera tomograph.

Results. According to the ultrasound examination of the urethra, between the symphysis and the anterior wall of the urethra, a volumetric formation with an even, clear contour of 43 × 33 × 40 mm was determined; urethra without focal pathology. On a series of MRI scans of the small pelvis in the retropubic fat between the posterior-lower edge of the symphysis and the anterior wall of the urethra, a heterogeneous avascular cystic-solid mass of 3.0 × 2.8 cm in size was determined that did not separate from them; a solid component of the type of multiple fibrous septa; the cystic component of the formation is associated with an unexpanded cavity of the joint space of the symphysis, containing fluid. The use of ultrasound examination of the urethra using 3D reconstruction in combination with magnetic resonance imaging of the small pelvis helped to make a diagnosis and determine further tactics for managing the patient.

Conclusion. The above clinical observation demonstrated that the complex application of various methods of radiation diagnostics helps to accurately determine the organ belonging to a volumetric formation. This allows you to choose the right tactics for managing patients in the shortest possible time.

1. Paraurethral formation in women. Guidelines. Gvozdev M.Yu., Arefieva O.A., Zabrodina N.B., Vasilyeva M.A. M.: LLC “ID ABV-press”, 2019. 45 p. (In Russian)

2. Chechneva M.A., Buyanova S.N., Popov A.A., Krasnopolskaya I.V. Ultrasound diagnosis of genital prolapse and urinary incontinence in women. M.: MED press-inform, 2016. 136 p. (In Russian)

3. Medvedev M.V., Altynnik N.A., Shatokha Yu.V. Ultrasound diagnostics in gynecology: international consensus and volumetric echography. Moscow: Real Time, 2018. 197 p. (In Russian)

4. Gazhonova V. E. Ultrasound diagnostics in gynecology. 3D. Moscow.: MEDpress-inform, 2005. 264 p. (In Russian)

5. Moroz N.V. Ultrasound in the assessment of the pelvic floor. Bulletin of the Voronezh State Medical University. 2015; 14 (2): 31–37. (In Russian)

6. Bulanov M.N. Ultrasound gynecology. Lecture course. Moscow: Vidar, 2017. 560 p. (In Russian)

7. Logutova L.S., Chechneva M.A., Lysenko S.N., Cherkasova N.Yu. Ultrasound diagnosis of the state of the pubic joint in women. breast cancer. Mother and Child. 2015; 1: 42–45. (In Russian)

8. Santoro J.A., Vechorek A.P., Shoiberi S.A. Interobserver and interdisciplinary reproducibility of three-dimensional endovaginal ultrasound of the pelvic floor organs. International urogynecological journal of pelvic floor dysfunction research. 2011; 22 (1): 53–59. (In Russian)

9. Mitkov V.V. A practical guide to ultrasound diagnostics. Moscow: Vidar, 2019. 756 p. (In Russian)