| Literature DB >> 28003825 |
Mohamed Laban1, Sherif H Hussain1, Alaa S Hassanin1, Waleed M Khalaf1, Mohamed K Etman2, Mohammed S E Elsafty1, Ahmed M Bahaa Eldin1, Ahmad S Hasanien3, Noha A Sakna1, Mohammed Taema1, Mohammed H Mostafa1, Marwa M Eisa1.
Abstract
The aim is to compare hysteroscopy, two-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound (2D TVUS), and three-dimensional (3D) Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis™ (VOCAL) to detect endometrial polyps (EPs) in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). This prospective study was done at Ain Shams Maternity Hospital, Egypt, from March 5, 2015, to December 30, 2015, enrolling 118 premenopausal women with AUB. 2D TVUS, 3D VOCAL, and hysteroscopy were done. 109 patients reached final analysis. 36 women (33%) were diagnosed with EP by 2D TVUS. 50 (45.9%) had EP by hysteroscopy. Endometrial thickness was 10.1 mm by 2D TVUS and endometrial volume was 4.92 mL by VOCAL in women with EP by hysteroscopy compared to 9.9 mm and 3.50 mL in women with no EP, respectively (P = 0.223; P = 0.06). 2D TVUS has sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 54%, 84.7%, 75%, and 68.5%, respectively. Endometrial thickness of >7.5 mm has sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy of 82%, 37.3%, 52.6%, 71%, and 57.8%, respectively. Endometrial volume of >1.2 mL has sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy of 90%, 42.4%, 57%, 83.3%, and 64.2%, respectively. 3D VOCAL may be used as a noninvasive method for the diagnosis of EP in premenopausal women with AUB.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28003825 PMCID: PMC5143713 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3561324
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Obstet Gynecol Int ISSN: 1687-9597
Figure 1Endometrial polyp identified by 2D TVUS in one of the participants.
Figure 2Box plot showing the distribution of values of endometrial thickness of the participants measured by 2D TVUS. Markers represent individual observations. Box represents the interquartile range. Line inside the box represents the median. Whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values excluding outliers and extreme observations.
Figure 3Endometrial volume measured by VOCAL for one of the participants.
Figure 4Box plot showing the distribution of the values of endometrial volume of the participants measured by VOCAL. Markers represent individual observations. Box represents the interquartile range. Line inside the box represents the median. Whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values excluding outliers and extreme observations.
Data of all participants.
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 35 (29.8–44.0) |
| Parity | |
| Para 0 to para 3 | 90 (82.6%) |
| Para 4 to para 7 | 19 (17.4%) |
| Endometrial polyps by 2D TVUS | 36 (33%) |
| Endometrial thickness by 2D TVUS (mm) | 10.0 (7.4–12.9); range: 2.3–30.1 |
| Endometrial volume by VOCAL (mL) | 4.59 (1.18–7.39); range: 0.12–33.5 |
| Endometrial polyp by hysteroscopy | 50 (45.9%) |
Data are median (interquartile range) or number (%).
Figure 5Box plot showing values of endometrial thickness measured by 2D TVUS in patients with or without endometrial polyps. Box represents the interquartile range. Line inside the box represents the median. Whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values excluding outliers (rounded markers) and extreme observations (asterisks).
Data of women with and without endometrial polyps diagnosed by hysteroscopy.
| Variable | Endometrial polyps by hysteroscopy ( | No endometrial polyps by hysteroscopy ( |
| DF/ |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 36.6 ± 8.0 | 35.3 ± 9.1 | −0.783 | 107 | 0.435 |
| Parity | 1.158 | 1 | 0.282 | ||
| Para 0 to para 3 | 41 (82.0%) | 49 (83.0%) | |||
| Para 4 to para 7 | 9 (18.0%) | 10 (17.0%) | |||
| Endometrial thickness by 2D TVUS (mm) | 10.1 (8.0–12.9) | 9.9 (6.0–12.8) | 1274.50 | 1.219 | 0.223 |
| Endometrial volume by VOCAL (mL) | 4.92 (2.60–7.40) | 3.50 (0.46–7.30) | 1168.50 | 1.864 | 0.062 |
Data are presented as mean ± SD, number (%), or median (interquartile range).
Figure 6Box plot showing values of endometrial volume measured by VOCAL in patients with or without endometrial polyps. Box represents the interquartile range. Line inside the box represents the median. Whiskers represent the minimum and maximum values excluding outliers (rounded markers) and extreme observations (asterisks).
Figure 7Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve for differentiating between patients with or without endometrial polyps using endometrial thickness measured by 2D TVUS.
Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the value of endometrial volume as estimated with VOCAL in discrimination between patients with or without hysteroscopically diagnosed endometrial polyps.
| ROC index | Value | 95% confidence interval |
|---|---|---|
| Area under the ROC curve (AUC) | 0.604 | 0.506–0.696 |
|
| 1.881 | |
|
| 0.060 | |
| Cut-off criterion | >1.2 mL | |
| Youden index ( | 0.324 | |
| Accuracy | 64.2% | |
| Sensitivity | 90.0% | 78.2%–96.7% |
| Specificity | 42.4% | 29.6%–55.9% |
| Positive likelihood ratio (+LR) | 1.56 | 1.2–2.0 |
| Negative likelihood ratio (−LR) | 0.24 | 0.10–0.6 |
| Positive predictive value (+PV) | 57.0% | 45.3%–68.1% |
| Negative predictive value (−PV) | 83.3% | 65.3%–94.4% |
aDeLong method.
Figure 8Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve for differentiating between patients with or without endometrial polyps using the endometrial volume measured by VOCAL.
| 2D TVUS | Hysteroscopy | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 27 | 9 | 36 |
|
| 23 | 50 | 73 |
|
| 50 | 59 | 109 |
| Statistical parameter | Value | 95% confidence interval |
|---|---|---|
| Correct classification | 70.6% | 62.1%–79.2% |
| Misclassification | 29.4% | 20.8%–37.9% |
| Sensitivity | 54.0% | 40.4%–67.0% |
| Specificity | 84.7% | 73.2%–91.9% |
| False positive rate | 15.3% | 6.4%–24.1% |
| False negative rate | 46.0% | 32.7%–59.3% |
| Prevalence | 45.9% | 36.5%–55.2% |
| Positive predictive value (PPV) | 75.0% | 60.9%–89.1% |
| Negative predictive value (NPV) | 68.5% | 57.8%–79.1% |
| Positive likelihood ratio (LR+) | 3.54 | 1.84–6.81 |
| Negative likelihood ratio (LR−) | 0.54 | 0.39–0.75 |
Data in contingency table are numbers of patients.
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 109 |
| Endometrial polyp by hysteroscopy | 50 (45.87%) |
| No endometrial polyp by hysteroscopy | 59 (54.13%) |
| Disease prevalence | 45.9% |
| ROC index | Value | 95% confidence interval |
|---|---|---|
| Area under the ROC curve (AUC) | 0.568 | 0.470 to 0.663 |
|
| 1.229 | |
|
| 0.219 | |
| Cut-off criterion | >7.5 mm | |
| Youden index ( | 0.1929 | |
| Accuracy | 57.8% | |
| Sensitivity | 82.0% | 68.6%–91.4% |
| Specificity | 37.3% | 25.0%–50.9% |
| Positive likelihood ratio (+LR) | 1.3 | 1.0–1.7 |
| Negative likelihood ratio (−LR) | 0.5 | 0.2–1.0 |
| Positive predictive value (+PV) | 52.6% | 40.9%–64.0% |
| Negative predictive value (−PV) | 71.0% | 52.0%–85.9% |
aDeLong method.