TY  - JOUR
T1  - The comparison of two endometrial biopsy techniques in detection of endometrial pathologies
TT  - Endometrial patolojilerin araştırılmasında iki endometrial biyopsi tekniğinin araştırılması
AU  - Bodur, Serkan
AU  - Pehlivan, Hüseyin
AU  - Güler, Askın Evren
AU  - Çakmak, Bülent
AU  - Atasever, Melahat
AU  - Kıncı, Mehmet Ferdi
AU  - Yenen, Müfit Cemal
PY  - 2019
DA  - April
Y2  - 2018
DO  - 10.33713/egetbd.458304
JF  - Ege Tıp Bilimleri Dergisi
JO  - AEGEAN J MED SCI
PB  - Uşak Cerrahi Derneği
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2636-851X
SP  - 26
EP  - 30
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
LA  - en
AB  - Objective: The purposeof this study is to compare the diagnostic performance of hysteroscopicendometrial biopsy (H/S) and probe curettage (P/C) in the diagnosis ofendometrial pathologies. Material andMethods: Our study was conducted at a tertiary obstetrics andgynecology clinic between December 2010 and July 2011. In our prospectivestudy, histopathological results of both biopsies with H/S and P/C applied to83 patients admitted to our clinic for evaluation of endometrium, were examinedand compared with combine procedure (H/S and P/C). Results: Histopathological results were asfollows: endometrial polyps (48%), endometrial hyperplasia (13.2%), submucousmyoma (4.8%), endometrial cancer (4.8%), and normal endometrial tissue (28.9%). Sensitivity values of biopsy with H/S versusbiopsy with P/C for the endometrial polyp, submucous myoma, endometrialhyperplasia and endometrial cancer were found as 97.5% vs. %54,6, 100% vs.%25 ,75% vs. %100 and 63.6% vs. %100, respectively. Conclusion: H/S was apparentlysuperior to P/C in diagnosis of focal lesions such as endometrial polyps andsubmucous myoma. We determined none of the interventions to be statisticallysuperior to the other in diagnosis of diffuse lesions such as endometrialhyperplasia and endometrial cancer.
KW  - Endometrial pathology
KW  - hysteroscopy
KW  - probe currettage
N2  - Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, endometriyal patolojilerin tanısında histeroskopikendometriyal biyopsi (H / S) ve prob kürtajının (P / C) tanısal performansınıkarşılaştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmamız Aralık 2010-Temmuz 2011 tarihleri​​arasında üçüncü basamak doğum ve jinekoloji kliniğinde yapıldı. Prospektifçalışmalarımızda, değerlendirmeler için kliniğimize başvuran 83 hastaya H / Sve P / C biyopsilerinin histopatolojik sonuçları Endometriyum incelendi vekombine prosedürle (H / S ve P / C) karşılaştırıldı.Bulgular: Histopatolojik sonuçlar; endometriyal polipler (% 48),endometrial hiperplazi (% 13.2), submukoz myoma (% 4.8), endometrial kanser (%4.8) ve normal endometriyal doku (% 28.9) idi. Endometriyal polip, submüközmyom, endometriyal hiperplazi ve endometriyal kanser için H / S biyopsisi ilebiyopsi ve biyopsi ile biyopsi duyarlılık değerleri% 97.5 vs% 54,6,% 100 vs%25,% 75 olarak bulundu. Sırasıyla% 100 ve% 63.6 ve% 100.Sonuç: H / S, endometriyal polip ve submüköz myoma gibi fokal lezyonların tanısındaP / C'den daha üstündür. Endometriyal hiperplazi ve endometriyal kanser gibiyaygın lezyonların teşhisi için hiçbir müdahalenin diğerinden istatistikselolarak üstün olmadığını saptadık.
CR  - 1.	Lessey BA, Killam AP,Metzger DA. Immunohistochemical analysis of human uterine estrogen and progesterone receptors throughout the menstrual cycle. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998;67:334-9.2.	Fleischer AC, Gordon AN, Entman SS, et al: Transvaginal Scanning of the Endometriyum: Current and Potential Clinical Applications. In Fleischer AC, Romero R, Manning F (Eds): The Principles and Practice of Ultrasonography in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Norwalk, CT, Appleton and Lange, 1991.3.	Marret H, Fauconnier A, Chabbert-Buffet N, Cravello L. Clinical practice guidelines on menoorhagia: management of abnormal uterine bleeding before menopause Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;152:133-7.4.	De Vries LD, Dijkhuizen FP, Mol BW, Brolmann HA, Moret E, Heintz AP. Comparison of transvaginal sonography, saline infusion sonography, and hysteroscopy in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Clin Ultrasound 2000;28:217-23.5.	Motashaw ND, Dave S. Diagnostic and therapeutic hysteroscopy in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding. J Reprod Med 1990;3:616-20.6.	Hoo YC, Mak BS, Hsu C, Wong TS, Ma HK. Postmenopausal uterine bleeding of nonorganic cause. Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:225-8.7.	Parulaker SU. Significance of negative hysteroscopic view in abnormal uterine bleeding. J Postgrad Med 1992;38:62-4. 8.	Emanuel MH, Verdel MJ, Wamsteker K, Lammes FB. A prospective comparison of transvaginal US and diagnostic hysteroscopy in the evaluation of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding: clinical implications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:547-52.9.	Cronje HS. Diagnostic hysteroscopy after postmenopausal uterine bleeding. S Afr Med J 1984;66:773-4. 10.	Garutti G, Sambruni I, Cellani F, Garzia D, Alleva P, Luerti M. Hysteroscopy and transvaginal ultrasonography in postmenopausal women with uterine bleeding. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1999;65:25-33. 11.	Mencaglia L, Vale RF, Perino A, Gilardi G.. Endometriyal carcinoma and its precursors: Early detection and treatment. Int J Gynekol Obstet 1990;31:107-16.12.	Hidlebaugh D. A comparison of clinical outcomes and cost of office versus hospital hysteroscopy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1996;4:39-45. 13.	Gimpleson R. Office hysteroscopy. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1992;35:270-81. 14.	Goldstein SR. Incorporating endovaginal ultrasonography into the overall gynecologic examination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;162:625-32. 15.	Crescini C, Artuso A, Repetti F, Reale D, Pezzica E. Hysteroscopic diagnosis in patients with abnormal uterine hemorrhage and previous endometriyal curettage. Minerva Ginecol 1992;44:233-5. 16.	Maia H Jr, Barbosa IC, Farias JP, Ladipo OA, Coutinho EM. Evaluation of the endometriyal cavity during menopause. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1996;52:61-6. 17.	Madan SM, Al-Jufairi ZA. Abnormal uterine bleeding. Diagnostic value of hysteroscopy. Saudi Med J 2001;22:153-6. 18.	Svirsky R, Smorgick N, Rozowsky U, Sagiv R. Can we rely on blind endometrial biopsy for detection of focal intrauterine pathology? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:1-3.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.33713/egetbd.458304
L1  - http://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/667450
ER  -