Literature DB >> 12350192

Accuracy of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: a systematic quantitative review.

T Justin Clark1, Doris Voit, Janesh K Gupta, Christopher Hyde, Fujian Song, Khalid S Khan.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Hysteroscopy (direct endoscopic visualization of the endometrial cavity) is used extensively in the evaluation of common gynecologic problems, such as menorrhagia and postmenopausal bleeding. However, there is a continuing debate about the value of this technology in the diagnosis of serious endometrial disease.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of hysteroscopy in diagnosing endometrial cancer and hyperplasia in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified through searches of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (1984-2001), manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and contact with manufacturers. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were selected blindly, independently, and in duplicate if accuracy of hysteroscopy was estimated in women with abnormal uterine bleeding, using histopathologic findings as a reference standard. Our search identified 3486 articles; 208 of these were deemed to be potentially eligible and were retrieved for detailed data extraction. Sixty-five primary studies were analyzed, including 26 346 women. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were abstracted on characteristics and quality from each study. Results for diagnostic accuracy were extracted to form 2 x 2 contingency tables separately for endometrial cancer and endometrial disease (cancer, hyperplasia, or both). Pooled likelihood ratios (LRs) were used as summary accuracy measures. DATA SYNTHESIS: The pretest probability of endometrial cancer was 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7%-4.2%). A positive hysteroscopy result (pooled LR, 60.9; 95% CI, 51.2-72.5) increased the probability of cancer to 71.8% (95% CI, 67.0%-76.6%), whereas a negative hysteroscopy result (pooled LR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13-0.18) reduced the probability of cancer to 0.6% (95% CI, 0.5%-0.8%). There was statistical heterogeneity in pooling of LRs, but an explanation for this could not be found in spectrum composition and study quality. The overall accuracy for the diagnosis of endometrial disease was modest compared with that of cancer, and the results were heterogeneous. The accuracy tended to be higher among postmenopausal women and in the outpatient setting.
CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy is high for endometrial cancer, but only moderate for endometrial disease (cancer or hyperplasia).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12350192     DOI: 10.1001/jama.288.13.1610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  38 in total

1.  Does duration of hysteroscopy increase the risk of disease recurrence in patients with endometrial cancer? A multi-centre trial.

Authors:  Clemens Tempfer; Georg Froese; Bernd Buerkle; Stephan Polterauer; Christoph Grimm; Nicole Concin; Gerda Hofstetter; Monika Weigert; Martin K Oehler
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 2.447

2.  Outpatient uterine assessment and treatment unit in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding: an economic modelling study.

Authors:  Alexandria Bennett; Kednapa Thavorn; Kristina Arendas; Doug Coyle; Sukhbir S Singh
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2020-12-08

Review 3.  Circulating Transcripts and Biomarkers in Uterine Tumors: Is There a Predictive Role?

Authors:  Christine De Bruyn; Thaïs Baert; Thierry Van den Bosch; An Coosemans
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 5.075

4.  Controversies in the management of endometrial cancer.

Authors:  V Masciullo; G Amadio; D Lo Russo; I Raimondo; A Giordano; G Scambia
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2010-06-16

Review 5.  Local anaesthesia for pain control during outpatient hysteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Natalie A M Cooper; Khalid S Khan; T Justin Clark
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

6.  Does experience in hysteroscopy improve accuracy and inter-observer agreement in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding?

Authors:  Nicolas Bourdel; Paola Modaffari; Enrica Tognazza; Riccardo Pertile; Pauline Chauvet; Revaz Botchorishivili; Dennis Savary; Jean Luc Pouly; Benoit Rabischong; Michel Canis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Using virtual-reality simulation to ensure basic competence in hysteroscopy.

Authors:  Mona M Savran; Anders Bo Nielsen; Bente Baekholm Poulsen; Poul Bak Thorsen; Lars Konge
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Diagnostic hysteroscopy and saline infusion sonography in the diagnosis of intrauterine abnormalities: an assessment of patient preference.

Authors:  Heleen van Dongen; Anne Timmermans; Cathrien E Jacobi; Trudy Elskamp; Cor D de Kroon; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2010-12-30

9.  Evaluation of the risk of spreading endometrial cell by hysteroscopy: a prospective longitudinal study.

Authors:  Rievani de Sousa Damião; Reginaldo Guedes Coelho Lopes; Emilly Serapião Dos Santos; Umberto Gazzi Lippi; Eduardo Borges da Fonseca
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2009-05-25

10.  Hysteroscopic findings in women at risk of HNPCC. Results of a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Fabrice Lécuru; Ulrike Metzger; Catherine Scarabin; Marie Aude Le Frère Belda; Sylviane Olschwang; Pierre Laurent Puig
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2007-04-06       Impact factor: 2.446

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.