Pipelle endometrial sampling versus conventional dilatation & curettage in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding

Objective: This study was designed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of Pipelle endometrial sampling with conventional dilatation & curettage in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Material and Methods: One hundred and forty patients with abnormal uterine bleeding were included in this comparative study; where endometrial sampling was carried out before cervical dilatation by Pipelle device followed by conventional dilatation & curettage (D&C). The histopathology report of the Pipelle sample was compared with that of the dilatation & curettage sample and the dilatation & curettage reports were considered as the gold standard. Results: 100% of the samples obtained by conventional D&C, while 97.9% of the samples obtained by the Pipelle device were adequate for histopathological examination. The histolopathological examination of 140 samples obtained by conventional D&C revealed proliferative endometrium in 37 specimens, secretory endometrium in 33 specimens, endometrial hyperplasia in 49 specimens (45 without atypia & 4 with atypia), endometritis in 8 specimens, endometrial polyps in 3 specimens and malignant endometrium in 10 specimens. In this study; the Pipelle device had 100% sensitivity, 100% specificity and 100% accuracy for diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia, endometrial carcinoma, proliferative and secretory endometrium. Also, it had 88.9% sensitivity, and 99.2% negative predictive value (NPV) and 99.3% accuracy for diagnosing endometritis and it had 60% sensitivity, 89.6% NPV and 98.6% accuracy for diagnosing endometrial polyps. Conclusion: The endometrial sampling using Pipelle is a safe, accurate, cost effective outpatient procedure, which avoids general anesthesia and has a high sensitivity and specificity for detection of endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial malignancy. © 2013 by the Turkish-German Gynecological Education and Research Foundation.