Diagnostic value of preoperative probe curettage, hysteroscopy, endocervical curettage and colposcopy in patients who were hysterectomised for benign diseases

Year 2004, Volume: 35 Issue: 3, 105 - 110, 01.04.2004

Levent Yaşar Süha Sönmez Yakup Şensoy Kadir Savan Osman Özyurt Ziya Çebi Fehmi Yazıcıoğlu Mehmet Aygün Sefa Kelekci

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare diagnostic value of hysteroscopy, colposcopy, endocervical curettage (EC), probe curettage (PC) with transvaginal ultrasonografi (TVS) and CS in for benign diseases patients who were hystenectomised. Materials and Methods: Totally 153 patients who applied to Stileymaniye Maternity Hospital between March 2001 and July 2002 were decided to be done hysterectomy for benign diseases were included in study. In all patients vaginal examination, CS, TVS, PC, EC, hysteroscopy and colposcopy were performed. The preoperative findings were compared with intraoperative and histopathologic examination of the hysterectomy material. Statistical analysis were done by Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test. P0.05): Conclusion: In patients who are planned hysterectomy for benign diseases., CS and TVS are enough for preoperative evaluation and there is no need to perform hysteroscopy, PC, EC and colpos¬copy for diagnostic procedures.

Keywords

Curettage, Hysterectomy, Colposcopy, Hysteroscopy, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures

Benign nedenlerle yapılan histerektomi öncesi probe küretaj, kolposkopi, histeroskopi ve endoservikal küretajın tanısal değeri

Abstract

Amaç: Benign nedenlerle histerektomi yapılan hastalarda preoperatif servikovajinal smear(SS) ve transvajinal ultrasonografi(TVS) ile probe küretaj(PK), kolposkopi, endoservikal kürtaj, histeroskopinin tanisal değerlerinin karşılaştırılması Materyal-Metod: Mart 2001- Temmuz 2002 tarihleri arasında Süleymaniye Doğum ve Kadın Hastalıkları Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesine başvuran ve benign nedenlerle histerektomi yapılan toplam 153 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Tüm hastalara servikovajinal smear alındıktan sonra jinekolojik muayene, TVS, kolposkopi, histeroskopi, endoservikal ve PK yapıldı. Preoperatif bulgularla, postoperatif ameliyat piyesinin histopatolojik bulguları karşılaştırıldı. Veriler SPSS-II ile Wilcoxon'un işaretli sıralar eşleştirilmiş testi kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Kolposkopik biopsi ve postoperatif patolojik muayenede hiçbir hastada malign lezyon saptanmadı. Olguların SS ve endoservikal küretajları ile serviksin patolojik inceleme sonuçları arasında fark bulunamadı. Endometriyumun histopatolojik değerlendirilmesinde PK, TVS ve histeroskopi bulguları arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunamadı(P>0.05 j. Sonuç: Benign sebeplerle histerektomi yapılacak hastalara sadece SS ve TVS yapıldığında malign bir lezyon atlanmamaktadır. Bu hastalara PK, endoservikal küretaj, histeroskopi ve kolposkopi yapmanın tanıya önemli bir katkısı olmamaktadır.

Keywords

Küretaj, Histerektomi, Kolposkopi, Histeroskopi, Tanı teknik ve işlemleri

References

• 1- Bachmann GA. Hysterectomy: a critical review. J Reprod Med 1990;3 5:839 2- Carlson K, Miller B, Flowler F. The Maine Women's Health Study II. Outcomes of nonsurgical management of leimyomas, abnormal bleeding, and chronic pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:566 3- Doyle JC. Unnecessary: hysterectomies: a study of 6,248- operations in 35 hospitals during 1948. JAMA 1953;151:65 4- Stafl A, Willbanks G. An international terminology of colposcopy report of the nomenclature commute of the international federation of cervical pathology and colposcopy .Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:313 5-Panos JC, Jones B A, Mazzara PF. Usefulness of concurrent Papanicolaou smear at the cervical biopsy. Diagn Cytopathol 2001;254:270-3 6-Labbe S, Petitjean A. False negatives and quality insurance in cervico uterine cytology. Ann Pathol 1999 ; 19(5):457-61 7- Lyon DS, Kaminski PF, Wheelock JB.Significance of positive Papanicolaou smear in a well screened population. South Med J 1989 ; 82(2):190-2
• 8- Benedet JL, Anderson GH, Simpson ML. Colposcopy, conization and histerectomypractices: A current perspective. Obstet Gynecol 1982;60:539-545 9 -Jordan JA. Colposcopy in the diagnosis of cervical cancer and precancer. Clin in Obstet Gynecol 1985;12:67-76 10-Klam S, Arseneau J, Mansour N, Franco E, Ferenczy A. Comparison of endocervical curettage and endocervical brushing Obstet Gynecol 2000 ;9 6(1): 90-4 11-Moniak CW, Kutzner S, Adam E, Harden J, Kaufman RH. Endocervical curettage in evaluating abnormal cervical cytology. J Reprod Med 2000 ;45(4):285-92 12-Savan K, Yaşar L, Çebi Z, Çankaya A, Küpelioğlu L. Anormal Sitolojik Bulguları veya Anormal Servikal Görünümü Olan Olgularda Kolposkopik Muayene ve Endoservikal Küretaj Sonuçlarının Değerlendirilmesi. Jinekoloji ve Obstetrik Dergisi 2002; 16(1): 45-49 13-Grimes DA. Diagnostic office curettage -.heresy no longer. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1986;27:96-102 14- Shipley CFrd, Simpson CL, Nelson GH. Comparison of transvaginal sonography with endometrial biopsy in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. Ultrasound Med 1994 Feb:13(2)99-104 15- Valle RE Hysteroscopic evaluation of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1981; 153:521-6 16. Scott PS. Diagnostic Hysteroscopy to evaluate the cause of abnormal uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol Clin North America 2000; Vol 2-7 (2) :277-87 17- Dueholm M, LundorfE, Hansen ES, Ledertoug S, Olenson F. Evaluating of the uterine cavity with magnetic resonance imaging, tranvaginal sonography, hysteroscopic examination and diagnostic hysteroscopy. Fertil Steril 2001;76(2):350-7 18- Gull B, Carlsson S, Karlsson B. Transvaginal ultrasonography of the endometrium in women with postmenopausal bleeding; is it always necessary to perform an endometrial biopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;182(3):509-15 19. Fabres C, Alam V, Balmacede F, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mackenna A, Fernandez Ef. Comparison of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of intrauterine lesions in the infertile women. Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1998 ;5 (4) :375-8