Hysteroscopy-view with targeted biopsy in the assessment of endometrial carcinoma. What’s the rate of underestimated diagnosis of atypical hyperplasia? The results of a multicenter Italian trial

Objective: In the last two decades many reports demonstrated the unreliability of endometrial biopsy pathology showing an AH (Atypical Hyperplasia) to exclude a synchronous EEC (Endometrioid Endometrial Carcinoma), with an underestimation of EEC in up to 50% of women. Hysteroscopy is now considered the standard diagnostic tool for endometrial pathology. However, a recent meta-analysis showed that hysteroscopically-guided biopsy provides a high rate of failure with respect to dilatation and curettage (D&C) and endometrial resection, in underestimating AH instead of concurrent EC. The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity of hysteroscopy-view and hysteroscopic sampling in diagnosing EEC. Materials and Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, observational trial was conducted between January 2012 and December 2018 in 14 Italian Gynecological Units (University-affiliated or Public Hospitals). Eligible patients were identified as those women in whom either a pathologic report of EEC was found on hysterectomy specimen and a preoperative hysteroscopy assessment with endometrial biopsy targeted under vision had been performed. As primary outcome we calculated the sensitivity of hysteroscopy-view and biopsy pathology on hysteroscopically-driven sampling in the diagnostic work-up of EC. Results: 948 patients (age 65,83±10,43) resulted eligible for analysis. Hysteroscopy-view showed a sensitivity of 54.2%, specificity 47,2% and accuracy 54% in the diagnosis of EC. Moreover, hysteroscopic view was significantly able to distinguish carcinoma from hyperplasia (p<0.001). We evidenced an important difference of the results comparing the centers involved. Hysteroscopy-driven biopsy presented a sensitivity of 76,2%, a specificity of 52,8% and an accuracy of 75,3%. AH pathology was reported in 19% of the cases. Conclusion: Our study showed that EEC diagnosis via hysteroscopy diagnosis could be improved through the implementation of operator training. Hysteroscopy-driven biopsies have excellent sensitivity and accuracy in the diagnosis of EEC, and the advantages of using hysteroscopy for making a diagnosis can improve the management of the patients with EEC. While it seems reasonable that hysteroscopy is the preferred technique for diagnosing and treating a benign pathology of the uterus, it could play a major role even in the diagnosis of a malignancy.

[1]  A. Olawaiye,et al.  The Accuracy of Endometrial Sampling in the Diagnosis of Patients With Endometrial Carcinoma and Hyperplasia , 2021, 50 Studies Every Obstetrician-Gynecologist Should Know.

[2]  S. Angioni,et al.  Conservative treatment for well-differentiated endometrial cancer: when and why it should be considered in young women , 2019, Ecancermedicalscience.

[3]  M. Canis,et al.  Sampling in Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia: Which Method Results in the Lowest Underestimation of Endometrial Cancer? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. , 2016, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[4]  E. Cicinelli,et al.  Laparoscopic treatment of early-stage endometrial cancer with and without uterine manipulator: Our experience and review of literature. , 2016, Surgical oncology.

[5]  M. Dueholm,et al.  Structured Hysteroscopic Evaluation of Endometrium in Women With Postmenopausal Bleeding. , 2015, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[6]  R. Broaddus,et al.  Clinically significant endometrial cancer risk following a diagnosis of complex atypical hyperplasia. , 2014, Gynecologic oncology.

[7]  W. C. Ang,et al.  Complex Atypical Hyperplasia of the Endometrium , 2014, Reproductive sciences.

[8]  S. Angioni,et al.  Re: Intensive programme in 'minimally invasive procedures in endoscopic gynecology'. A teaching course supported by EU funds. , 2013, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[9]  S. Antonsen,et al.  Patients with atypical hyperplasia of the endometrium should be treated in oncological centers. , 2012, Gynecologic oncology.

[10]  S. Angioni,et al.  Indications of diagnostic hysteroscopy, a brief review of the literature , 2012, Gynecological Surgery.

[11]  A. Genazzani,et al.  Office vaginoscopic hysteroscopy in infertile women: effects of gynecologist experience, instrument size, and distention medium on patient discomfort. , 2010, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[12]  M. Armstrong,et al.  Complex Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia: The Risk of Unrecognized Adenocarcinoma and Value of Preoperative Dilation and Curettage , 2009, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  K. Newton,et al.  Incidence of endometrial hyperplasia. , 2009, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[14]  S. Pecorelli Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium , 2009 .

[15]  Rochelle L. Garcia,et al.  Diagnosing Endometrial Hyperplasia: Why is it so Difficult to Agree? , 2008, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[16]  G. Melis,et al.  Detection of benign intracavitary lesions in postmenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a prospective comparative study on outpatient hysteroscopy and blind biopsy. , 2008, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[17]  G. Vilos,et al.  Resectoscopic surgery may be an alternative to hysterectomy in high-risk women with atypical endometrial hyperplasia. , 2007, Journal of minimally invasive gynecology.

[18]  R. Zaino,et al.  Concurrent endometrial carcinoma in women with a biopsy diagnosis of atypical endometrial hyperplasia , 2006, Cancer.

[19]  T. Wright,et al.  Prevalence of Underlying Adenocarcinoma in Women with Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia , 2005, International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Pathologists.

[20]  J. Dotto,et al.  Classification of microhysteroscopic images and their correlation with histologic diagnoses. , 2003 .

[21]  T Justin Clark,et al.  Accuracy of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: a systematic quantitative review. , 2002, JAMA.

[22]  O. Ceci,et al.  Comparison of hysteroscopic and hysterectomy findings for assessing the diagnostic accuracy of office hysteroscopy. , 2002, Fertility and sterility.

[23]  G. Garuti,et al.  Accuracy of hysteroscopy in predicting histopathology of endometrium in 1500 women. , 2001, The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists.

[24]  R. Gimpelson,et al.  A comparative study between panoramic hysteroscopy with directed biopsies and dilatation and curettage. A review of 276 cases. , 1988, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[25]  R. Kurman,et al.  The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-term study of “untreated” hyperplasia in 170 patients , 1986 .