Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy

Ava R. Sierecki, Deleep Kumar Gudipudi, Nadine Montemarano, Giuseppe Del Priore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare adequacy of specimens obtained by 3 different endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques - corkscrew, modified dilatation and curettage (D&C) and a combination of both, with or without povidone-iodine cervical cleansing. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of a single group practice using a single endometrial aspiration biopsy device for all 3 techniques. Each attending indicated their method of use with the device. For diagnostic purposes, specimen adequacy was categorized as "satisfactory, " "suboptimal" and "insufficient." RESULTS: There were 66 corksaew, 71 modified D&C and 55 biopsies performed using the combined technique. Mean age was 48; 62.5% were premenopausal and 89% had a normal-sized uterus. Postmenopausal patients were more likely than younger women to have suboptimal or insufficient samples, 27% vs. 11%, respectively. Using the combined technique was better (95%) than the corkscrew alone (77%) for satisfactory specimens. Diagnosis was possible in 90% of specimens. CONCLUSION: The combined technique appears to be better than using either technique alone. Povidone-iodine cervical cleansing is safe but may be unnecessary. Because of the large numbers of endometrial biopsies performed yearly, even a small difference in test characteristics can have significant clinical ramifications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)760-764
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist
Volume53
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 1 2008

Fingerprint

Povidone-Iodine
Dilatation and Curettage
Needle Biopsy
Biopsy
Equipment and Supplies
Group Practice
Uterus

Keywords

  • Endometrial biopsy
  • Techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Sierecki, A. R., Gudipudi, D. K., Montemarano, N., & Del Priore, G. (2008). Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy. Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist, 53(10), 760-764.

Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy. / Sierecki, Ava R.; Gudipudi, Deleep Kumar; Montemarano, Nadine; Del Priore, Giuseppe.

In: Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist, Vol. 53, No. 10, 01.10.2008, p. 760-764.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sierecki, AR, Gudipudi, DK, Montemarano, N & Del Priore, G 2008, 'Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy', Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist, vol. 53, no. 10, pp. 760-764.
Sierecki, Ava R. ; Gudipudi, Deleep Kumar ; Montemarano, Nadine ; Del Priore, Giuseppe. / Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy. In: Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist. 2008 ; Vol. 53, No. 10. pp. 760-764.
@article{c34960600cfb4882beaad542610b37de,
title = "Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To compare adequacy of specimens obtained by 3 different endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques - corkscrew, modified dilatation and curettage (D&C) and a combination of both, with or without povidone-iodine cervical cleansing. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of a single group practice using a single endometrial aspiration biopsy device for all 3 techniques. Each attending indicated their method of use with the device. For diagnostic purposes, specimen adequacy was categorized as {"}satisfactory, {"} {"}suboptimal{"} and {"}insufficient.{"} RESULTS: There were 66 corksaew, 71 modified D&C and 55 biopsies performed using the combined technique. Mean age was 48; 62.5{\%} were premenopausal and 89{\%} had a normal-sized uterus. Postmenopausal patients were more likely than younger women to have suboptimal or insufficient samples, 27{\%} vs. 11{\%}, respectively. Using the combined technique was better (95{\%}) than the corkscrew alone (77{\%}) for satisfactory specimens. Diagnosis was possible in 90{\%} of specimens. CONCLUSION: The combined technique appears to be better than using either technique alone. Povidone-iodine cervical cleansing is safe but may be unnecessary. Because of the large numbers of endometrial biopsies performed yearly, even a small difference in test characteristics can have significant clinical ramifications.",
keywords = "Endometrial biopsy, Techniques",
author = "Sierecki, {Ava R.} and Gudipudi, {Deleep Kumar} and Nadine Montemarano and {Del Priore}, Giuseppe",
year = "2008",
month = "10",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "760--764",
journal = "The Journal of reproductive medicine",
issn = "0024-7758",
publisher = "Donna Kessel",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy

AU - Sierecki, Ava R.

AU - Gudipudi, Deleep Kumar

AU - Montemarano, Nadine

AU - Del Priore, Giuseppe

PY - 2008/10/1

Y1 - 2008/10/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare adequacy of specimens obtained by 3 different endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques - corkscrew, modified dilatation and curettage (D&C) and a combination of both, with or without povidone-iodine cervical cleansing. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of a single group practice using a single endometrial aspiration biopsy device for all 3 techniques. Each attending indicated their method of use with the device. For diagnostic purposes, specimen adequacy was categorized as "satisfactory, " "suboptimal" and "insufficient." RESULTS: There were 66 corksaew, 71 modified D&C and 55 biopsies performed using the combined technique. Mean age was 48; 62.5% were premenopausal and 89% had a normal-sized uterus. Postmenopausal patients were more likely than younger women to have suboptimal or insufficient samples, 27% vs. 11%, respectively. Using the combined technique was better (95%) than the corkscrew alone (77%) for satisfactory specimens. Diagnosis was possible in 90% of specimens. CONCLUSION: The combined technique appears to be better than using either technique alone. Povidone-iodine cervical cleansing is safe but may be unnecessary. Because of the large numbers of endometrial biopsies performed yearly, even a small difference in test characteristics can have significant clinical ramifications.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To compare adequacy of specimens obtained by 3 different endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques - corkscrew, modified dilatation and curettage (D&C) and a combination of both, with or without povidone-iodine cervical cleansing. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review of a single group practice using a single endometrial aspiration biopsy device for all 3 techniques. Each attending indicated their method of use with the device. For diagnostic purposes, specimen adequacy was categorized as "satisfactory, " "suboptimal" and "insufficient." RESULTS: There were 66 corksaew, 71 modified D&C and 55 biopsies performed using the combined technique. Mean age was 48; 62.5% were premenopausal and 89% had a normal-sized uterus. Postmenopausal patients were more likely than younger women to have suboptimal or insufficient samples, 27% vs. 11%, respectively. Using the combined technique was better (95%) than the corkscrew alone (77%) for satisfactory specimens. Diagnosis was possible in 90% of specimens. CONCLUSION: The combined technique appears to be better than using either technique alone. Povidone-iodine cervical cleansing is safe but may be unnecessary. Because of the large numbers of endometrial biopsies performed yearly, even a small difference in test characteristics can have significant clinical ramifications.

KW - Endometrial biopsy

KW - Techniques

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=55349101242&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=55349101242&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 19004401

AN - SCOPUS:55349101242

VL - 53

SP - 760

EP - 764

JO - The Journal of reproductive medicine

JF - The Journal of reproductive medicine

SN - 0024-7758

IS - 10

ER -