Is there a place for sonohysterobiopsy in the evaluation of endometrial pathologies in postmenopausal asymptomatic women with thickened endometrium?

Year 2020, , 1080 - 1088, 30.09.2020

Abdurrahman Tokalıoglu , Berna Dilbaz , Runa Özelçi , Eda Tokalıoglu Bora Çoşkun

https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.690986

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was o compare the diagnostic value of sonohysterobiopsy to a method involving saline infusion sonography followed by dilatation and curettage in detecting endometrial pathologies in postmenopausal asymptomatic women with an endometrial thickness greater than 5 mm.
Materials and Methods: Asymptomatic postmenopausal women who were diagnosed by means of transvaginal ultrasonography with endometrial thickness greater than 5 mm were assigned to two diagnostic groups prior to hysteroscopy. The study group included patients who underwent sonohysterobiopsy (SHB) during saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS). The control group included patients who underwent SIS followed by dilatation and curettage (D&C).
Results: In 35 patients (35%), at least one of the risk factors for endometrial malignancy was present. The histopathological evaluation of the specimens showed presence of a polyp in 40 (60%) patients who underwent SIS and D&C. SHB results were more concordant with the hysteroscopic findings compared to those of SIS and D&C. The cut-off value for the accurate diagnosis of an endometrial polyp with SHB was 10 mm, with a sensitivity of 96% and a specificity of 100%.
Conclusion: Sonohysterobiopsy is an efficient and safe procedure with a high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of endometrial pathologies.

Keywords

sonohysterobiopsy, endometrial pathology, postmenopaısal

Asemptomatik postmenopozal kadınlardaki endometrial patolojilerin değerlendirilmesinde sonohisterobiopsinin yeri var mı?

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı endometrial kalınlık ölçümü 5 mm üzerinde olan asemptomatik postmenopozal kadınlarda salin infüzyon sonografi sonrası dilatasyon ve kuretaj ile sonohisterobiopsinin (SHB) tanısal değerlerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır
Gereç ve yöntem: Transvajinal ultrasonografi ile endometrium kalınlığı 5 mm üzeri tespit edilen asemptomatik postmenopozal kadınlar histeroskopi öncesinde iki gruba ayrıldı. Salin infuzyon sonografi (SIS) ile eş zamanlı sonohisterobiopsi yapılan 50 olgu çalışma grubu olarak (Grup 1), salin infuzyon sonografi ardından kuretaj yapılan hastalar ise kontrol grubu olarak belirlendi(Grup2).
Bulgular: Olguların %35’inde endometrium kanseri açısından en az 1 tane risk faktörü vardı. SIS ve sonrasında kuretaj yapılan hastaların %60’ ınde histopatolojik incelemede polip bulundu. SHB bulguları SIS ve kuretaj yapılan olgularla karşılaştırıldığında histeroskopik bulgularla daha uyumlu bulundu. SHB ile endometrial poliplerin kesin tanı ve tedavisi için eşik değer % 96 duyarlılık ve %100 özgüllük ile 10 mm olarak bulundu.
Sonuç: SHB endometrial patolojilerin tanı ve tedavisinde yüksek duyarlılık ve özgüllüğe sahip etkili ve güvenli bir yöntemdir.

Keywords

sonohisterobiopsi, postmenopozal, endometrial pathology

References

• 1.Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2007; 57(1):43–66
• 2.GLOBOCAN 2012. htpp://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_population.aspx
• 3.Jr GD, Annegers JF, Fountain KS. Carcinoma of the endometrium:stage I. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;136(7):872–88.
• 4.Nasri MN, Shepherd JH, Setchell ME, Lowe DG, Chard T. The role of vaginal scan in measurement of endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol.1991;98(5):470–5.
• 5.Blumenfeld ML, Turner LP. Role of transvaginal sonography in the evaluation of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1996;39:641–55.
• 6.Kim A, Lee JY, Chun S,Kim HY. Diagnostic utility of three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound for postmenopausal bleeding. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 54 221-226
• 7.Seshadri S, Khalil M, Osman A, Clough A, Jayaprakasan K, Khalaf Y. The evolving role of saline infusion sonography (SIS) in infertility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;185 66–73.
• 8.Dubinsky TJ, Parvey HR, Gormaz G, Curtis M, Maklad N.Transvaginal hysterosonography: comparison with biopsy inthe evaluation of postmenopausal bleeding. J Ultrasound Med. 1995;14:887–93.
• 9.O’Connell LP, Fries MH, Zeringue E, Brehm W. Triage of abnormal postmenopausal bleeding: a comparison of endometrial biopsy and transvaginal sonohysterography versus fractional curettage with hysteroscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol.1998;178:956–61.
• 10.Moschos E, Ashfaq R, McIntire DD, Liriano B, Twickler DM. Saline-Infusion Sonography Endometrial Sampling Compared With EndometrialBiopsy in Diagnosing Endometrial Pathology. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:881–7.
• 11.Wei AY, Schink JC, Pritts EA, Olive DL, Linheim SR. Salinecontrast sonohysterography and directed extraction, resectionand biopsy of intrauterine pathology using a Uterine Explora Curette. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 27:202–5.
• 12.Yasa C, Dural O, Bastu E, Ugurlucan FG, Nehir A, Iyibozkurt AC. Evaluation of the diagnostic role of transvaginal ultrasoundmeasurements of endometrial thickness to detect endometrial malignancy in asymptomatic postmenopausal women Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016; 294:311–316.
• 13.Barut A, Barut F, Arikan I, Harma M, Harma MI, Ozmen Bayar U. Comparison of the histopathological diagnoses of preoperative dilatation and curettage and hysterectomy specimens.J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2012; 38(1):16–22.
• 14.Demirkiran F, Yavuz E, Erenel H, Bese T, Arvas M, Sanioglu C. Which is the best technique for endometrial sampling? Aspiration (pipelle) versus dilatation and curettage (D&C). Arch Gynecol Obstet . 2012 Nov;286(5):1277-82.
• 15.Stock RJ, Kanbour A. Prehysterectomy curettage.Obstet Gynecol1975;45: 537-541.
• 16.Agostini A, Shojaı R, Cravello L, Rojat-Habib MC, Roger V, Bretelle F, Blanc B. Endometrialbiopsy during outpatient hysteroscopy: Evaluation and comparison of two devices. Eur JObstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97:220–222.
• 17.Bettocchi S, Ceci O, Vicino M, Marello F, Impedovo L, Selvaggi L. Diagnostic inadequacy of dilatation and curettage. Fertil Steril.2001; 75(4):803–805.
• 18.Domingues AP, Lopes H, Diax I, De Oliveira CF. Endometrial polyps in postmenopausal women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88:618-620.
• 19.Ferrazzi E, Zupi E, Leone FP, et al. How often are endometrial polypsmalignant in asymptomatic postmenopausal women? A multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 200:235.
• 20.Epstein E, Ramirez A, Skoog L, Valentin L. Dilatation and curettage fails to detect most focal lesions in the uterine cavity inwomen with postmenopausal bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001; 80(12):1131–1136
• 21.Svirsky R, Smorgick N, Rozowski U et al. Can we rely on blind endometrial biopsyfor detection of focal intrauterine pathology? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199:115.e1–3.
• 22.Lev-Sagie A, Hamani Y, Imbar T, Hurwitz A, Lavy Y. The significance of intrauterine lesions detected by ultrasound in asymptomatic postmenopausal patients.BJOG .2005;112:379-381.
• 23.Fernandez-Parra J, Rodriguez OA, Lopez CS, Parrilla FF, Montoya VF. Hysteroscopic evaluation of endometrial polyps.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006; 95:144-148.
• 24.Lieng M, Qvigstad E, Sandvik L, Jorgensen H, Langebrekke A, Istre O. Hysteroscopic resection of symptomatic and asymptomatic endometrial polyps.J Minim Invasive Gynecol.2007;14:189-194.
• 25.Huang GS, Gebb JS, Einstein MH, Shahabi S, Novetsky AP, Goldberg GL. Accuracy of preoperative endometrial sampling for the detection of high-grade endometrial tumors. Am J Obstet Gynecol.2007; 196(3):243.e1–243.e5.
• 26.Widrich T, Bradley LD, Mitchinson AR, Collins RL. Comparison of saline infusion sonography with office hysteroscopy for the evaluation of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174:1327-34.
• 27.Soguktas S, Cogendez E, Kayatas SE, Asoglu MR, Selcuk S, Ertekin A. Comparison of saline infusion sonohysterography and hysteroscopy in diagnosis of premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol.2012 ;161: 66-70.
• 28.de Kroon CD, de Bock GH, Dieben SW, Jansen FW. Saline contrast hysterosonography in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2003;110:938–47.
• 29.Moschos E, Bailey AA,Twickler DM. Comparison of Saline Infusion Sonography(SIS) Versus SIS-Guided Endometrial Sampling in the Diagnosis of Endometrial Pathology .J Clin Ultrasound. 2016; 44:416–422.
• 30.Leone FPG, Carsana L, Lanzanı C, Vago G, Ferrazzı E. Sonohysterographic endometrial sampling and hysteroscopic endometrial biopsy: a comparative study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;29: 443–448.
• 31.Rotenberg O, Renz M, Reimers L, et al.Simultaneous Endometrial Aspiration and Sonohysterography for the Evaluation of Endometrial Pathology in Women Aged 50 Years and Older. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:414–23.
• 32.Mihm LM, Quick VA, Brumfield JA, Connors AF, Finnerty JJ. The accuracy of endometrial biopsy and salinesonohysterography in the determination of the cause of abnormal uterine bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:858-60.
• 33.Metzger U, Bernard JP, Camatte S et al. Sono-Guided Endometrial Biopsy:Comparison with Hysteroscopy Biopsy. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2004;58:26–31.
• 34.Bingol B, Gunenc MZ, Gedikbasi A, Guner H, Tasdemir S, Tiras B. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography, transvaginalsonography and hysteroscopy in postmenopausal bleeding. Arch Gynecol Obstet .2011; 284(1):111–117.
• 35.Mathew M, Gowri V, Rizvi SG. Saline infusion sonohysterography—an effective tool for evaluation of the endometrial cavity in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Sca.2010; 89(1):140–142.