Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia and Unexpected Cancers at Final Histology: A Study on Endometrial Sampling Methods and Risk Factors

被引:20
作者
Giannella, Luca [1 ]
Delli Carpini, Giovanni [1 ]
Sopracordevole, Francesco [2 ]
Papiccio, Maria [1 ]
Serri, Matteo [1 ]
Giorda, Giorgio [2 ]
Tsiroglou, Dimitrios [1 ]
Del Fabro, Anna [2 ]
Ciavattini, Andrea [1 ]
机构
[1] Polytech Univ Marche, Gynecol Sect, Womans Hlth Sci Dept, I-60121 Ancona, Italy
[2] Natl Canc Inst, Gynecol Oncol Unit, Ctr Riferimento Oncol, I-33081 Aviano, Italy
关键词
atypical endometrial hyperplasia; endometrial cancer; risk factors; dilation and curettage; hysteroscopically guided biopsy; hysteroscopic endometrial resection; HYSTEROSCOPY; DIAGNOSIS; CLASSIFICATION; HYSTERECTOMY; ACCURACY; WOMEN;
D O I
10.3390/diagnostics10070474
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Up to 40% of women with atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) can reveal endometrial cancer (EC) at hysterectomy. The pre-operative endometrial sampling method (ESM) and some independent cancer predictors may affect this outcome. The present study aimed to compare the rate of EC at hysterectomy in women with AEH undergoing dilation and curettage (D&C), hysteroscopically-guided biopsy (HSC-bio), or hysteroscopic endometrial resection (HSC-res). The secondary outcome was to compare the reliability of ESMs in women showing independent variables associated with EC. Methods: Two-hundred-and-eight consecutive women with AEH and undergoing hysterectomy between January 2000 and December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Based on pre- and post-test probability analysis for EC, three ESMs were compared: D&C, HSC-bio, and HSC-res. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess risk factors predicting cancer on final histology. Finally, the patient's characteristics were compared between the three ESM groups. Results: D&C and HSC-bio included 75 women in each group, while HSC-res included 58 women. Forty-nine women (23.6%) revealed cancer at hysterectomy (pre-test probability). Post-test probability analysis showed that HSC-res had the lowest percentage of EC underestimation: HSC-res = 11.6%; HSC-bio = 19.5%; D&C = 35.3%. Patient characteristics showed no significant differences between the three ESMs. Multivariate analysis showed that body mass index >= 40 (Odds Ratio (OR) = 19.75; Confidence Intervals (CI) 2.193-177.829), and age (criterion > 60 years) (OR = 1.055, CI 1.002-1.111) associated significantly with EC. In women with one or both risk factors, post-test probability analysis showed that HSC-res was the only method with a lower EC rate at hysterectomy compared to a pre-test probability of 44.2%: HSC-res = 19.96%; HSC-bio = 53.81%; D&C = 63.12%. Conclusions: HSC-res provided the lowest rate of EC underestimation in AEH, also in women showing EC predictors. These data may be considered for better diagnostic and therapeutic planning of AEH.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2000, Applied Logistic Regression
[2]   Diagnosis and Management of Endometrial Hyperplasia [J].
Armstrong, Amy J. ;
Hurd, William W. ;
Elguero, Sonia ;
Barker, Nichole M. ;
Zanotti, Kristine M. .
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2012, 19 (05) :562-571
[3]   The molecular genetics and morphometry-based Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia classification system predicts disease progression in Endometrial hyperplasia more accurately than the 1994 World Health Organization classification system [J].
Baak, JP ;
Mutter, GL ;
Robboy, S ;
van Diest, PJ ;
Uyterlinde, AM ;
Orbo, A ;
Palazzo, J ;
Fiane, B ;
Lovslett, K ;
Burger, C ;
Voorhorst, F ;
Verheijen, RH .
CANCER, 2005, 103 (11) :2304-2312
[4]  
Bedner R, 2007, EUR J GYNAECOL ONCOL, V28, P400
[5]   Does hysteroscopy affect prognosis in apparent early-stage endometrial cancer? [J].
Ben-Arie, A. ;
Tamir, S. ;
Dubnik, S. ;
Gemer, O. ;
Ben Shushan, A. ;
Dgani, R. ;
Peer, G. ;
Barnett-Griness, O. ;
Lavie, O. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2008, 18 (04) :813-819
[6]   Sampling in Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia: Which Method Results in the Lowest Underestimation of Endometrial Cancer? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [J].
Bourdel, Nicolas ;
Chauvet, Pauline ;
Tognazza, Enrica ;
Pereira, Bruno ;
Botchorishvili, Revaz ;
Canis, Michel .
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 2016, 23 (05) :692-701
[7]   Comparison of hysteroscopic and hysterectomy findings for assessing the diagnostic accuracy of office hysteroscopy [J].
Ceci, O ;
Bettocchi, S ;
Pellegrino, A ;
Impedovo, L ;
Di Venere, R ;
Pansini, N .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2002, 78 (03) :628-631
[8]   Thickness of preperitoneal fat as a predictor of malignancy in overweight and obese women with endometrial polyps [J].
Ciavattini, Andrea ;
Di Giuseppe, Jacopo ;
Clemente, Nicolo ;
Moriconi, Lorenzo ;
Carpini, Giovanni Delli ;
Montik, Nina ;
Mazzanti, Laura .
ONCOLOGY LETTERS, 2016, 11 (03) :2278-2282
[9]   ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-up [J].
Colombo, Nicoletta ;
Creutzberg, Carien ;
Amant, Frederic ;
Bosse, Tjalling ;
Gonzalez-Martin, Antonio ;
Ledermann, Jonathan ;
Marth, Christian ;
Nout, Remi ;
Querleu, Denis ;
Mirza, Mansoor Raza ;
Sessa, Cristiana .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2016, 26 (01) :2-30
[10]   Statistics notes - Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios [J].
Deeks, JJ ;
Altman, DG .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 329 (7458) :168-169