SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Medical Network Klinik Bilimler ve Doktor / 2000 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 5

Comparison of the diagnostic value of D&C, pipelle, Karman canulla, Novak curette for endometrium cancer and endometrial hyperplasia in abnormal uterine bleeding patients

Anormal uterin kanamalı olgularda D&C, pipel, Karman kanül, Novak küret'in, endometrium kanseri ve endometrial hiperplazi için tanısal değerlerinin karşılaştırılması

S. Cansun DEMİR
M. Ali VARDAR
Emre KARATEKELİ
Nihat ARIDOĞAN
Oktay KADAYIFÇI
Pages
674–679
DOI
—
🏛️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)

CONCLUSION: As a result, pipelle, Novak curette, Karman cannula were found to be effective as D&C for the diagnosis of endometrial pathologies in the cases of abnormal uterine bleeding.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVE: This study is designed to compare diagnostic value of the D&C with different endometrial sampling methods (pipelle, Novak currette, Karman cannula), in the cases of abnormal uterine bleeding.
📊
Key Findings & Data:RESULTS: When the histopathological diagnosis of the hysterectomy specimen was taken as a gold standart the sensitivitiy of D&C and pipelle, Karman canulla.Novak curette was 88.7 %, 75 %, 80 %, 75% respectively; Specifity was 97.9%, 100%, 97 %, 96.4 % ; Positive predictive value was 88.4 %, 100 %, 80 %, 75 %; Negative predictive value was 94 % , 97.3 %, 97 % and 96.4% respectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: As a result, pipelle, Novak curette, Karman cannula were found to be effective as D&C for the diagnosis of endometrial pathologies in the cases of abnormal uterine bleeding.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Uterus kanamaları · Kateterizasyon · Tanı teknikleri

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study is designed to compare diagnostic value of the D&C with different endometrial sampling methods (pipelle, Novak currette, Karman cannula), in the cases of abnormal uterine bleeding. MATERIAL AND METHOD: One hundred fourteen cases in whom hysterectomy was indicated because of abnormal uterine bleeding were included in this study. RESULTS: When the histopathological diagnosis of the hysterectomy specimen was taken as a gold standart the sensitivitiy of D&C and pipelle, Karman canulla.Novak curette was 88.7 %, 75 %, 80 %, 75% respectively; Specifity was 97.9%, 100%, 97 %, 96.4 % ; Positive predictive value was 88.4 %, 100 %, 80 %, 75 %; Negative predictive value was 94 % , 97.3 %, 97 % and 96.4% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the D&C and other sampling methods in terms of diagnostic value (p>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of insufficient tissue for diagnosis obtained by these methods (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: As a result, pipelle, Novak curette, Karman cannula were found to be effective as D&C for the diagnosis of endometrial pathologies in the cases of abnormal uterine bleeding.

Özet

AMAÇ: Anormal uterin kanamalı olgularda, D&C ile farklı endometrial örnekleme yöntemlerinin (pipel, Karman kanül, Novak kiiret) tanısal değerini karşılaştırmak. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Çalışmaya, anormal uterin kanama nedeniyle histerektomi endikasyonu konan 114 olgu alındı. BULGULAR: Histerektomi spesmenlerinin histopatolojik tanısı altın standart alındığında D&C ve pipel,karman kanül ve Novak küretin sensitivitesi sırasıyla % 88.7,% 75,% 80,% 75;Spesifltesi sırasıyla,% 97.9, % 100,% 97, % 96.4;Pozitif prediktif değeri % 88.4,% 100, %80,% 75; negatif prediktif değeri ise %94 ,% 97.3,% 97 ve % 96.4 olarak bulundu. Diagnostik değer açısından, D&C ve diğer örnekleme yöntemleri arasında istatistiksel bir fark olmadığı saptanmıştır (p>0.05).Tanı için yetersiz materyal elde etme oranı açısından, dört yöntem arasında istatistiksel bir fark saptanmamıştır (p>0.05). SONUÇ: Anormal uterin kanamalı olgularda, endometrial patolojileri teşhiste pipel, Karman kanül ve Novak küretin D&C kadar etkin yöntemler olduğu kanısındayız.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, S. C., VARDAR, M. A., KARATEKELİ, E., ARIDOĞAN, N., KADAYIFÇI, O. (2000). Comparison of the diagnostic value of D&C, pipelle, Karman canulla, Novak curette for endometrium cancer and endometrial hyperplasia in abnormal uterine bleeding patients. Medical Network Klinik Bilimler ve Doktor, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 5, 674–679. https://ajindex.com/articles/278750

References (9)

  1. Chambers JT, Chambers SK: Endometrial Sampling; When? Where0 Why" With What?. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 1992;35:29-39
  2. Nesse R: Abnormal Vaginal Bleeding in Perimenopausal Women, Am Fam Physician, 1989;40:185
  3. Buttler WJ: Normal and Abnormal Uterine Bleeding. In Te Linde's Operative Gynecology (Eds Rock JA, Thompson JA). Eight Editon. Lippincott-Rosen, U.S.A, 1996;22:453-475
  4. Feldman S, Anne Ş, Berkowitz S: Two Year Follow up to 263 Patients with Peri-Post Menapausal Bleeding and Negative Initial Biopsy. Gynecol Oncology, 1994;55:56-59
  5. Baruch BG, Seideman DS,Schiff E,et al: Outpatient endometrial Sampling with the Pipelle Curette, Gynecol Obstet Invest, 1994;37:260-262
  6. Fortergill DJ, Brown VA, Hill AS: Histological Sampling of the endometrium-a Comparison Between Formal Curretage and Pipelle Sampler. Br J Obstet Gynecol, 1982;99:779-780
  7. Suarez RA, Grimes DA, Majmudor B, et al: diagnostic Endometiral Aspiration with the Karman Cannula, J Reprod Med, 1983;28:41-44
  8. Stock RJ, Kanbour A: Prehystrectomy Curretage, Obstet Gynecol, 1975;45:537-541
  9. Zorlu CG, Çobanoğlu O, Işık AZ, et al: Accuracy of Pipelle Endometrial Sampling in Endometrial Carcinoma, Gynecol Obstet Invest, 1994;38:272-5. 10.Batool T, Reginal PW, Hughes JH, et al: Outpatient Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy in the Investigation of Postmenopausal Bleeding, Br J Obstet Gyneacol, 1994;101:545-546. 11.Henig I, Chon P, Treadway DR, et al: Evaluation of the Pipelle Currette for Endometrial Biopsy, J Reprod Med, 1989;34:786-789. 12.Stoval TG, Photopulas GS, Puston WM: Pipelle Endometrial Sampling in Patients With Known Endometrial Carsinoma, Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:954-956. 13.Stoval TG, Solomon SK, Ling FW: Endometiral Sampling Prior to Hystrectomy, Obstet Gynecol, 1989;73:405-409. 14.Stoval TG, Ling FW, Morgan PL: A Prospective Randomized Comparison of the Pipelle Endometrial Sampling Device with Novak Curette, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1991;165:1287-1289. 15.Koos LG, SchriberK, Moussouris H, et al: Endometrial Cariconoma and It's Precursors: Detecting and Screening, Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1982;25:49-61. 16.Larson DM, Krawisz BR, Johnson KK, et al: Comprasion of the Z Sampler and Novak Endometrial biopsy Instruments for Office Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer, Gynecol Oncol,1994;54:64-67. 17.Koonings PP, Grimes DA: Endometiral Sampling Techniques for the Office. Am Fam Physician, 1989;40:207-210. 18.Richart RM, Pringle P: Choosing the Right Biosy Device: Contempt. Obstet Gynecol, 1985;23:4