Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations


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
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 1 2008


  • Endometrial biopsy
  • Techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques specimen adequacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this