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: Comparison of endometrial aspiration biopsy techniques: specimen adequacy.
    Author: Sierecki AR, Gudipudi DK, Montemarano N, Del Priore G.
    Journal: J Reprod Med; 2008 Oct; 53(10):760-4. PubMed ID: 19004401.
    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 corkscrew, 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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]