Objective: We evaluated the clinical performance of liquid-based endometrial cytology (SurePath™) for detecting endometrial malignancies by comparison with the performance of suction endometrial tissue biopsy. Study Design: From November 2011 to May 2013, we consecutively collected 1,118 liquid-based endometrial cytology specimens and 674 suction endometrial tissue biopsy specimens. Results: The rate of nonpositive final histology in nonpositive liquid-based endometrial cytology (98.2%) was higher than the rate of nonpositive final histology in nonpositive suction endometrial tissue biopsy (97.0%). None of the clinical performance values of liquid-based endometrial cytology for detecting the endometrial malignancies were statistically inferior to those of the suction endometrial tissue biopsy. When the positivity threshold was more than “atypical endometrial cells of undetermined significance,” the rate of positive liquid-based endometrial cytology from cases with a positive final histology (84.5%) was higher than the rate of positive suction endometrial tissue biopsy from cases with a positive final histology (69.8%). However, there were still no significant differences among all the performance values. Conclusions: Our liquid-based endometrial cytology would be more appropriate in various clinical situations as the initial detection tool for endometrial malignancies, rather than suction endometrial tissue biopsy. In addition, it could be used in screening for endometrial malignancies on a broader scale.

Keywords:
Intrauterine sampling, SurePath™, Comparative study, Endometrial suction tissue biopsy, Liquid-based endometrial cytology
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.