Comparison of aspirating pipettes and hysteroscopy with curettage.

Purpose: In this prospective study, endometrial biopsy by pipette was compared with hysteroscopy with curettage in patients with an abnormal uterine bleeding (ABU) (hypermenorrhea, intermediate bleeding, continuous bleeding, postmenopausal bleeding) and patients with a sonographically abnormal endometrium.

Methods: 176 patients were included. The pipette samples were taken during the usual planned procedure under general anaesthesia. Thereafter, the planned hysteroscopy with curettage was completed. The study was performed as a double-blind study. The obtained histologies (of pipelle and curettage) were sent separately to the same pathologist. The pipelle material was encoded by a specific number without any patient data.

Results: In 97% of the cases using the biopsy with pipette were obtained an adequate sample. The biopsy with pipette had a sensitivity and specificity of 100% in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia. Pipette showed a significantly lower accuracy with a sensitivity of 28% in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. Pipette showed the lowest sensitivity for polyps, myomas and atrophic endometrium.

Conclusion: The study shows that pipette sampling is a safe, accurate, low-cost ambulatory procedure with high sensitivity for the detection of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial carcinoma. In the case of sonographically definable findings (polyp, myoma), hysteroscopy with curettage is preferred.