SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 88 Sayı: 3

A RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF NEOPLASTIC AND NON-NEOPLASTIC PATHOLOGIES IN NON-PREGNANCY ENDOMETRIAL TISSUE SAMPLES AND A LITERATURE REVIEW

GEBELİK DIŞI ENDOMETRİAL DOKU ÖRNEKLERİNDE NEOPLAZİK VE NONNEOPLAZİK PATOLOJİLERİN; LİTERATÜR EŞLİĞİNDE RETROSPEKTİF OLARAK İNCELENMESİ

Savaş Başar Gül(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine)0009-0006-0876-9617
Sıla Kadıoğlu(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine)0009-0000-7726-6948
Ecem Ömeroğlu(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine)0009-0003-6489-7216
Kaan Gülcan(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine)0009-0009-3460-2441
Gamze Nur Öter(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Pathology)0000-0002-7063-3984
Nedim Polat(Private Polat Pathology Laboratory)0000-0002-4491-9639
Nusret Erdoğan(İstinye University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medical Pathology)0000-0002-0333-8600
Pages
190–197
Publication Date
2025-07-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This aligns with the existing literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study retrospectively examined patients presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Based on the histopathological and clinical characteristics of the obtained data, we sought a statistical answer to the question “Do age, material type, clinical findings, clinical preliminary, and histopathological diagnosis parameters differ from the literature findings?” Material and Methods: A total of 2,000 endometrial samples were reviewed and filtered according to the appropriate parameters collected within 5 years (2017-2022).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This aligns with the existing literature.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2017-2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Endometrium · histopatoloji · tanı

Abstract

Objective: This study retrospectively examined patients presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding. Based on the histopathological and clinical characteristics of the obtained data, we sought a statistical answer to the question “Do age, material type, clinical findings, clinical preliminary, and histopathological diagnosis parameters differ from the literature findings?” Material and Methods: A total of 2,000 endometrial samples were reviewed and filtered according to the appropriate parameters collected within 5 years (2017-2022). The statistical significance of the data was measured using the ch-square test. Results: The study included 1,815 patients aged 19 to 86 years. In dications for endometrial sampling were classified as menometrorrhagia/menorrhagia (49.2%), endometrial polyp (19.5%), post-menopausal bleeding (18%), endometrial hyperplasia (14.6%), and leiomyoma (2.8%). Patients were grouped by menstrual status: premenopausal (51.6%, under 45 years), perimenopausal (25.39%, aged 45-51), and postmenopausal (22.97%, aged 51 and above). Histopathological findings showed benign pathologies including endometrial polyp (61.9%), proliferative/secretory endometrium (12%), atrophic endometrium (6.6%), and chronic endometritis (0.2%). The premalignant findings were endometrial hyperplasia without atypia (9%) and atypical hyperplasia of the endometrium (0.6%). Malignant findings included adenocarcinoma (1.2%). Conclusion: An in-depth answer was challenging due to insuffi cient data documentation in the current practice. Nevertheless, we have presented the concordance for the four major pathologies and their distribution in the patient population. Our study has shown that endometrial polyps are the pathology most frequently diagnosed correctly. Our study detected endometrial cancer predominantly in the postmenopausal group, emphasising the importance of endometrial sampling in this group. This aligns with the existing literature.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada anormal uterin kanama şikayetiyle gelen hastalar retrospektif olarak olarak incelenmiştir. Elde edilen verilerin histopatolojik ve klinik özelliklerinden yola çıkarak “yaş, materyal tipi, klinik bulgular, klinik ön tanı ve histopatolojik tanı parametreleri literatür bulguları ile farklılık gösteriyor mu?” sorusuna istatiksel olarak cevap aramak amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Son 5 yılda (2017-2022) gönderilen 2000 adet endometrial örnek taranmıştır ve uygun parametrelere göre filtrelenmiştir. Verilerin istatistiksel anlamlılığı Ki-Kare ile ölçülmüştür. Bulgular: Çalışmadaki 1815 hastanın yaşları 19-86 aralığındadır. Endometrial örnekleme endikasyon sınıflandırması: menometroraji/menoraji (%49,2), endometrial polip (%19,5) postmenopozal kanama (%18), endometrial hiperplazi (%14,6) ve leiomyom (%2,8) şeklindedir. Menstrüel durumlarına göre; 45 yaş altındaki hastalar premenopoz (%51,6), 45-51 yaş arası hastalar perimenopoz (%25,39), ve 51 yaş ve üstü hastalar postmenopoz (%22,97) şeklinde üç gruba ayrılmıştır. Histopatolojik olarak, benign histopatolojik bulgular arasında endometrial polip (%61,9), proliferatif/sekretuar endometrium (%12), atrofik endometrium (%6,6) ve kronik endometrit (%0,2) bulunmuştur. Pre-malign bulgularda, atipisiz endometrial hiperplazi (%9), ve atipik endometrial hiperplazi (%0,6), malign bulgular arasında ise adenokarsinom (%1,2) saptanmıştır. Sonuç: Güncel klinik ve laboratuvar pratiğinin sebep olduğu yetersiz veri dokümantasyonu nedeniyle çalışmamızda derinlemesine bir yanıt vermek zor olmuştur. Buna rağmen çalışmamız dört ana patolojinin ön tanı-histopatolojik tanı arasındaki uyumunu ve genel popülasyondaki dağılımını sunmuştur. Endometrial poliplerin en sık doğru teşhis edilen patoloji olduğunu göstermiştir. Çalışmamızda endometrial kanserin ağırlıklı olarak postmenopozal grupta görüldüğü tespit edilmiş olup bu durum, bu grupta endometrial örnekleme yapılmasının önemini vurgulamaktadır. Bu bulgu mevcut literatürle uyumludur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gül, S. B., Kadıoğlu, S., Ömeroğlu, E., Gülcan, K., Öter, G. N., Polat, N., Erdoğan, N. (2025). A RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF NEOPLASTIC AND NON-NEOPLASTIC PATHOLOGIES IN NON-PREGNANCY ENDOMETRIAL TISSUE SAMPLES AND A LITERATURE REVIEW. İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 88 Sayı: 3, 190–197. https://doi.org/10.26650/IUITFD.1563479

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. Brenner PF. Differential diagnosis of abnormal uterine bleeding. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(3 Pt 2):766-9. google scholar
  2. Dallenbach-Hellweg G. Histopathology of the endometrium. 4th ed. Berlin: Springer Verlang; 1987. google scholar
  3. Hoffman BL, Schorge JO, Bradshaw KD, Halvorson LM, Schaffer JI, Corton MM. Williams Gynecology. 3rd ed. New York: Mcgraw-Hill Education; 2016. google scholar
  4. Türkiye Endokriniloji ve Metabolizma Derneği. Menopoz. 2024 October 7. https://temd.org.tr/halk/hastaliklar/menopoz google scholar
  5. Menopause transition and menopause hormone therapy. In: Taylor HS, Pal L, Seli E, editors. Speroff’s clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams; 2020.p.589-92. google scholar
  6. National Instute on Aging. What is menopause? 2024 October 7. https://www. nia.nih.gov/health/menopause/what-menopause#:~:text=Menopause%20is% 20a%20point%20in,between%20ages%2045%20and%2055. google scholar
  7. Scotland’s National Health Information Service. After the menopause. 2024 October 7. https://www.nhsinform.scot/healthy-living/womens-health/later-years-around-50-years-and-over/menopause-and-post-menopause-health/ after-the-menopause/ google scholar
  8. Kouides PA, Conard J, Peyvandi F, Lukes A, Kadir R. Hemostasis and menstruation: appropriate investigation for underlying disorders of hemostasis in women with excessive menstrual bleeding. Fertil Steril 2005;84(5):1345-51. google scholar
  9. Akçay ÇM, Gürgör PN. Bir yıllık endometrial örneklerin retrospektif incelenmesi: 705 olgunun analizi. ODU Tıp Derg 2021;8(2):1-6. google scholar
  10. Kucur SK, Şencan H, Yüksel KB, Gözükara I, Keskin N, Seven A, et al. Evaluation of endometrial biopsy results in our clinic; analysis of 744 cases. Zeynep Kamil Med J 2014;45(3):146-50. google scholar
  11. Turan G, Bahat PY, Aslan Çetin B, Topbaş Selçuki NF. How compatible are hysterectomy pathology results with endometrial biopsy in abnormal uterine bleeding women? Kafkas Journal of Medical Sciences 2020;10(2):104-9. google scholar
  12. Wouk N, Helton M. Abnormal uterine bleeding in premenopausal women. Am Fam Physician 2019;99(7), 435-43. google scholar
  13. van Hanegem N, Prins MM, Bongers MY, Opmeer BC, Sahota DS, Mol BW, et al. The accuracy of endometrial sampling in women with postmenopausal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;197:147-55. google scholar
  14. Onat T, Demir Çaltekin M, Şahin S, Aytekin B, Başer E, Aydoğan Kırmızı D, et al. The evaluation of endometrial biopsy histopathological results according to age groups. Bozok Medical Journal 2021;1l(l):98-103. google scholar
  15. Budak MŞ, Şentürk MB, Akgöl S, Sakar MN, Tahaoğlu AE, Toğrul C, et al. Results of endometrial sampling in patients with abnormal premenopausal hemorrhages: analysis of 1492 cases. Gynecol Obstet Reprod Med 2016;2l(l):27-30 google scholar
  16. Dreisler E, Stampe Sorensen S, Ibsen PH, Lose G. Prevalence of endometrial polyps and abnormal uterine bleeding in a Danish population aged 20-74 years. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;33(l):102-8. google scholar
  17. Aker SŞ, Yüce T, Acar D, Atabekoğlu CS. Endometrial sampling results of women evaluated for abnormal uterine bleeding: a retrospective analysis of 765 women. Çukurova Medical Journal 2015;40:306-10. google scholar
  18. Inal ZO, Inal HA, Kucukosmanoglu I, Kucukkendirci H. Assessment of endometrial sampling and histopathological results: analysis of 4,247 cases. Eurasian J Med 2017;49(l):44-7. google scholar
  19. Saatli B, Yildirim N, Olgan S, Koyuncuoglu M, Emekci O, Saygılı U. The role of endometrial thickness for detecting endometrial pathologies in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2014;54(l):36-40. google scholar
  20. Özbilgeç S, Ellibeş Kaya A, Başbuğ A. Evaluation of sonographic findings and histopathologic results of endometrial sampling patients. Konuralp Medical J 2018;10(l):81-7. google scholar
  21. Esercan A, Demir I, Eskiyoruk I, Geckil O. Results of endometrial sampling in a tertiary hospital. Sanliurfa Education and Research Hospital 2023;15(4):e37454. google scholar
  22. Ateş S, Gökmen Karasu AF, Çalı H, Soyman Z, Uysal Ö. Factors Associated with insufficient endometrial sampling in postmenopausal women. Med Bull Haseki 2020;58(l):65-71. google scholar
  23. Yılmaz Doğru H, Özsoy AZ, Kunt İşgüder Ç, Arıcı A, Çakmak B, Delibaş IB, et al. The evaluation of endometrial sampling results: A tertiary centre experience. Medeniyet Medical J 2015;30(3):121-6. google scholar
  24. Gül A, Erkılınç G, Varan İ, Ark Ç, Seyyah Y, Başöz A, et al. Postmenopozal uterin kanamalarda endometrial histopatolojik bulgular. Jinekoloji ve Obstetrik Der 1996;10:227-9. google scholar
  25. Marsh Ç, Schumacher K, Nothnick WB, Taylor RB, Monard M. Secretory Phase and Implantation. In: Lutsenko O, editors. Menstrual cycle. London: IntechOpen; 2019.p.55-66 google scholar
  26. Polat N. Endometrial hiperplazide yeni sınıflandırma yöntemleri ve ayırıcı tanı kriterleri (Uzmanlık tezi). İstanbul: Şişli Etfal Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Patoloji Laboratuvarı; 2001. google scholar
  27. Van den Bosch T, Ameye L, Van Schoubroeck D, Bourne T, Timmerman D. Intra-cavitaRy uterine pathology in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a prospective study of 1220 women. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2015;7(l):17-24. google scholar
  28. Özsoy HM. Endometrial hiperplazi. Türk Jinekolojik Onkoloji Der Ekim 2012;15(4):101-3. google scholar
  29. Ellenson LH, Matias-Guiu X, Mutter GL, Lax SF. Tumours of the uterine corpus. İn: Kim K-R, Lax SF, Lazar AJ, Longacre TA, Malpica A, Matias-Guiu X, et al. Female genital tumours. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Çancer; 2020.p.248-51. google scholar
  30. Singh N, Sonawane S. Spectrum of endometrial pathology in abnormal uterine bleeding. Int J Health Sci Res 2017;7(9):28-34. google scholar
  31. Visser NÇM, Breijer MÇ, Herman MÇ, Bekkers RLM, Veersema S, Opmeer BÇ, et al. Factors attributing to the failure of endometrial sampling in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Açta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013;92(l0):1216-22. google scholar
  32. Baral R, Pudasaini S. Histopathological pattern of endometrial samples in abnormal uterine bleeding. Nepal Med Coll J 2011;l(l):13-6. google scholar
  33. Piatek S, Warzecha D, Kisielewski F, Szymusik I, Panek G, Wielgos M. Pipelle biopsy and dilatation and curettage in clinical practice: are factors affecting their effectiveness the same? J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2019;45(3):645-51. google scholar
  34. Oriel KA, Schrager S. Abnormal uterine bleeding. Am Fam Physician 1999;60(5):1371-82. google scholar
  35. Patrizi L, Ticconi C, Borelli B, Finocchiaro S, Chiaramonte C, Sesti F, et al. Clinical significance of endometrial abnormalities: an observational study on 1020 women undergoing hysteroscopic surgery. BMC Women's Health 2022;22:106. google scholar
  36. Kyejo W, Moshi B, Gidion D, Abeid M, Somji S, Kaguta M. A rare case report of tuberculosis endometritis in a private hospital Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. SAGE Open Med Case Rep 2023;11:2050313X221150054. google scholar
  37. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Tamoxifen and uterine cancer. Committee Opinion No. 601. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:1394-7. google scholar
  38. Sismondi P, Biglia N, Volpi E, Giai M, de Grandis T. Tamoxifen and endometrial cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1994;734:310-21. google scholar
  39. Bissett D, Davis JA, George WD. Gynaecological monitoring during tamoxifen therapy. Lancet 1994;344(8932):1244. google scholar
  40. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Redmond CK, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Cronin WM. Endometrial cancer in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients: findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-14. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86(7):527-37. google scholar