Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction · 2020
Can we rely on blind endometrial curettage for complete removal of focal intrauterine lesion? A prospective clinical study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ergenoglu Ahmet Mete, Hortu Ismet, Taylan Enes, Yeniel Ahmet Ozgur, Akdemir Ali, Sahin Cagdas, Karadadas Nedim
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the diagnostic and therapeutic efficiency of dilatation-curettage (D&C) combined with aspiration curettage for endometrial pathology compared to hysteroscopy alone in this study.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 143 patients who have suspicion of endometrial mass like lesion, increased endometrial thickness (>5-mm at menopause and/or endometrial thickness upper than 5-mm in patients under tamoxifen treatment due to breast cancer during 2-D transvaginal ultrasonography examination) were enrolled. All patients underwent procedures in order of hysteroscopy, D&C plus aspiration and second look hysteroscopy. Data for age, menopausal status, tamoxifen treatment, endometrial histology, hysteroscopy and D&C findings were recorded and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: Initial hysteroscopy revealed focally growing endometrial lesion in 96 patients. Second look hysteroscopy showed persistent focal lesion in 77 patients (80 %) after D&C plus aspiration. Endometrial blind curettage failed to diagnose 42 % (25/60) of endometrial polyps, none of submucous myomas as well as 27 % (3/11) of premalignant and malignant endometrial lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of hysteroscopy were found as 84.1 %, 83.3 %, 83.9 %, 93.8 %, and 63.8 %, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopy showed significant superiority in the diagnosis and definitive treatment of endometrial pathologies specifically in focally growing endometrial lesions compared to D&C plus aspiration.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 143 patients who have suspicion of endometrial mass like lesion, increased endometrial thickness (>5-mm at menopause and/or endometrial thickness upper than 5-mm in patients under tamoxifen treatment due to breast cancer during 2-D transvaginal ultrasonography examination) were enrolled. All patients underwent procedures in order of hysteroscopy, D&C plus aspiration and second look hysteroscopy. Data for age, menopausal status, tamoxifen treatment, endometrial histology, hysteroscopy and D&C findings were recorded and statistically analyzed.
RESULTS: Initial hysteroscopy revealed focally growing endometrial lesion in 96 patients. Second look hysteroscopy showed persistent focal lesion in 77 patients (80 %) after D&C plus aspiration. Endometrial blind curettage failed to diagnose 42 % (25/60) of endometrial polyps, none of submucous myomas as well as 27 % (3/11) of premalignant and malignant endometrial lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of hysteroscopy were found as 84.1 %, 83.3 %, 83.9 %, 93.8 %, and 63.8 %, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopy showed significant superiority in the diagnosis and definitive treatment of endometrial pathologies specifically in focally growing endometrial lesions compared to D&C plus aspiration.