These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Hysteroscopic vs histologic diagnosis. Study of 222 cases of abnormal uterine hemorrhage].
    Author: Caserta D, Toro G, Porretta M, Mancini E, Moscarini M.
    Journal: Minerva Ginecol; 1999 May; 51(5):169-72. PubMed ID: 10431524.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: AUB (abnormal uterine bleeding) is one of the most common pathologies. It is therefore important to use a method that is easy to carry out in order to ensure a rapid and reliable diagnosis. Hysteroscopy may represent the elective method for the study of the uterine cavity. METHODS: A total of 222 women suffering from AUB were studied between January 1996 and June 1997 at the Department of Surgery, Gynecology Clinic of L'Aquila University. Their age ranged between 30 and 74 years old. The exclusion criteria for the study were as follows: presence of a genital infection in active or latent phase, pregnancy in progress or abortion. All patients underwent operative hysteroscopy with targeted biopsy accompanied, when necessary, by endometrial ablation. All biopsies underwent histological analysis and the results of hysteroscopic diagnosis and histological diagnosis were then compared. RESULTS: There was a 85% correspondence between results. The main difficulties were encountered in the identification and selection of the characteristics of hyperplasia. Moreover, during the study it was found that hysteroscopy was both diagnostic and also therapeutic since it enabled the removal of polyps and intracavitary fibroma or endometrial ablation if required. CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopy was therefore found to be a totally reliable method for the study of abnormal uterine bleeding compared to the histological tests carried out.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]