Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of aspirating pipettes and hysteroscopy with curettage.
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020 06; 301(6):1485-1492.AG

Abstract

PURPOSE

In this prospective study, endometrial biopsy by pipette was compared with hysteroscopy with curettage in patients with an abnormal uterine bleeding (ABU) (hypermenorrhea, intermediate bleeding, continuous bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding) and patients with a sonographically abnormal endometrium.

METHODS

176 patients were included. The pipette samples were taken during the usual planned procedure under general anaesthesia. Thereafter, the planned hysteroscopy with curettage was completed. The study was performed as a double-blind study. The obtained histologies (of pipelle and curettage) were sent separately to the same pathologist. The pipelle material was encoded by a specific number without any patient data.

RESULTS

In 97% of the cases using the biopsy with pipette were obtained an adequate sample. The biopsy with pipette had a sensitivity and specificity of 100% in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia. Pipette showed a significantly lower accuracy with a sensitivity of 28% in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. Pipette showed the lowest sensitivity for polyps, myomas and atrophic endometrium.

CONCLUSION

The study shows that pipette sampling is a safe, accurate, low-cost ambulatory procedure with high sensitivity for the detection of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial carcinoma. In the case of sonographically definable findings (polyp, myoma), hysteroscopy with curettage is preferred.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics of the Evangelical Hospital Cologne Weyertal Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. piriyev.elvins@gmail.com.Practice for Pathology and Cytology Cologne Weyertal, Cologne, Germany.Clinic for Gynecology and Obstetrics of the Evangelical Hospital Cologne Weyertal Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

32350598

Citation

Piriyev, E, et al. "Comparison of Aspirating Pipettes and Hysteroscopy With Curettage." Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, vol. 301, no. 6, 2020, pp. 1485-1492.
Piriyev E, Mellin W, Römer T. Comparison of aspirating pipettes and hysteroscopy with curettage. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020;301(6):1485-1492.
Piriyev, E., Mellin, W., & Römer, T. (2020). Comparison of aspirating pipettes and hysteroscopy with curettage. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 301(6), 1485-1492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05551-0
Piriyev E, Mellin W, Römer T. Comparison of Aspirating Pipettes and Hysteroscopy With Curettage. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020;301(6):1485-1492. PubMed PMID: 32350598.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of aspirating pipettes and hysteroscopy with curettage. AU - Piriyev,E, AU - Mellin,W, AU - Römer,T, Y1 - 2020/04/29/ PY - 2020/02/20/received PY - 2020/04/11/accepted PY - 2020/5/1/pubmed PY - 2020/5/1/medline PY - 2020/5/1/entrez KW - Abnormal uterine bleeding KW - Curettage KW - Hysteroskopie KW - Pipelle SP - 1485 EP - 1492 JF - Archives of gynecology and obstetrics JO - Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. VL - 301 IS - 6 N2 - PURPOSE: In this prospective study, endometrial biopsy by pipette was compared with hysteroscopy with curettage in patients with an abnormal uterine bleeding (ABU) (hypermenorrhea, intermediate bleeding, continuous bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding) and patients with a sonographically abnormal endometrium. METHODS: 176 patients were included. The pipette samples were taken during the usual planned procedure under general anaesthesia. Thereafter, the planned hysteroscopy with curettage was completed. The study was performed as a double-blind study. The obtained histologies (of pipelle and curettage) were sent separately to the same pathologist. The pipelle material was encoded by a specific number without any patient data. RESULTS: In 97% of the cases using the biopsy with pipette were obtained an adequate sample. The biopsy with pipette had a sensitivity and specificity of 100% in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia. Pipette showed a significantly lower accuracy with a sensitivity of 28% in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. Pipette showed the lowest sensitivity for polyps, myomas and atrophic endometrium. CONCLUSION: The study shows that pipette sampling is a safe, accurate, low-cost ambulatory procedure with high sensitivity for the detection of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial carcinoma. In the case of sonographically definable findings (polyp, myoma), hysteroscopy with curettage is preferred. SN - 1432-0711 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/32350598/Comparison_of_aspirating_pipettes_and_hysteroscopy_with_curettage L2 - https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05551-0 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Try the Free App:
Prime PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPad
Prime PubMed app for Android
Prime PubMed is provided
free to individuals by:
Unbound Medicine.