Endometrial brush biopsy for the diagnosis of endometrial cancer.

G. Del Priore, R. Williams, C. B. Harbatkin, L. Wan, K. Mittal, G. Yang
{"title":"Endometrial brush biopsy for the diagnosis of endometrial cancer.","authors":"G. Del Priore, R. Williams, C. B. Harbatkin, L. Wan, K. Mittal, G. Yang","doi":"10.1097/00006254-200109000-00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo evaluate a new technique for processing endometrial cytology for the diagnosis and exclusion of endometrial cancer.\n\n\nSTUDY DESIGN\nAll women at risk for endometrial cancer with clinical indications for endometrial biopsy were evaluated by endometrial brush biopsy (Tao Brush, Cook OB-GYN, Bloomington, Indiana) and Pipelle (Cooper Surgical, Shelton, Connecticut) endometrial biopsies during one office visit. Patients were followed longitudinally for the development of endometrial cancer or until undergoing dilatation and curettage or hysterectomy. All comparisons were analyzed using the chi 2 or t test.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOne hundred one women (mean age, 58; range, 35-86) had endometrial biopsies performed. Median follow-up was > 21 months (range, 3-29). Twenty-two had cancer or atypia, while the remaining had benign diagnoses. When correlated with the final diagnosis, the Tao Brush had 95.5% sensitivity and the Pipelle, 86% sensitivity. Both devices had 100% specificity, positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 98%. When the results of the two biopsy devices are considered together, the positive and negative predictive value for detecting or excluding endometrial cancer was 100%. Based on 1998 Medicare reimbursements, a simultaneous second office biopsy using the Tao brush could save approximately $67 per case as compared to a sonohistogram and much more when compared to dilatation and curettage.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nEndometrial cancer can be reliably detected and excluded using these two distinct office biopsy devices simultaneously during one office visit. In patients with an indication for endometrial biopsy, no further diagnostic test may be necessary to exclude or diagnose endometrial cancer or atypia.","PeriodicalId":192418,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"41","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/00006254-200109000-00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To evaluate a new technique for processing endometrial cytology for the diagnosis and exclusion of endometrial cancer. STUDY DESIGN All women at risk for endometrial cancer with clinical indications for endometrial biopsy were evaluated by endometrial brush biopsy (Tao Brush, Cook OB-GYN, Bloomington, Indiana) and Pipelle (Cooper Surgical, Shelton, Connecticut) endometrial biopsies during one office visit. Patients were followed longitudinally for the development of endometrial cancer or until undergoing dilatation and curettage or hysterectomy. All comparisons were analyzed using the chi 2 or t test. RESULTS One hundred one women (mean age, 58; range, 35-86) had endometrial biopsies performed. Median follow-up was > 21 months (range, 3-29). Twenty-two had cancer or atypia, while the remaining had benign diagnoses. When correlated with the final diagnosis, the Tao Brush had 95.5% sensitivity and the Pipelle, 86% sensitivity. Both devices had 100% specificity, positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 98%. When the results of the two biopsy devices are considered together, the positive and negative predictive value for detecting or excluding endometrial cancer was 100%. Based on 1998 Medicare reimbursements, a simultaneous second office biopsy using the Tao brush could save approximately $67 per case as compared to a sonohistogram and much more when compared to dilatation and curettage. CONCLUSION Endometrial cancer can be reliably detected and excluded using these two distinct office biopsy devices simultaneously during one office visit. In patients with an indication for endometrial biopsy, no further diagnostic test may be necessary to exclude or diagnose endometrial cancer or atypia.
子宫内膜刷活检诊断子宫内膜癌。
目的探讨子宫内膜细胞学处理技术在子宫内膜癌诊断和排除中的应用价值。研究设计:所有有子宫内膜癌风险且有子宫内膜活检临床指征的女性在一次就诊期间通过子宫内膜刷活检(Tao brush, Cook OB-GYN, Bloomington, Indiana)和Pipelle (Cooper Surgical, Shelton, Connecticut)子宫内膜活检进行评估。对患者进行纵向随访,直至发生子宫内膜癌或进行子宫扩张刮除或子宫切除术。所有比较均采用chi 2或t检验进行分析。结果女性101例,平均年龄58岁;范围,35-86)进行子宫内膜活检。中位随访时间> 21个月(范围3-29)。22人患有癌症或异型性,其余为良性诊断。当与最终诊断相关时,Tao Brush的灵敏度为95.5%,Pipelle的灵敏度为86%。两种器械的特异性均为100%,阳性预测值为100%,阴性预测值为98%。当两种活检装置的结果综合考虑时,检测或排除子宫内膜癌的阳性和阴性预测值为100%。根据1998年的医疗保险报销,与超声直方图相比,使用Tao刷同时进行第二次办公室活检可以节省大约67美元,与扩张和刮除相比,可以节省更多。结论在一次就诊时,使用这两种不同的活检设备可以可靠地检测和排除子宫内膜癌。在有子宫内膜活检指征的患者中,可能不需要进一步的诊断检查来排除或诊断子宫内膜癌或异型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信