Larson D M, Krawisz B R, Johnson K K, Broste S K
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Marshfield Clinic, Wisconsin 54449-5777.
Gynecol Oncol. 1994 Jul;54(1):64-7. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1994.1167.
The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and specimen adequacy of in-office endometrial biopsies taken with the Novak curette and with a disposable flexible polypropylene biopsy device, the Z-sampler, in patients with endometrial cancer. Eighty women with endometrial cancer had in-office endometrial biopsies performed with the Z-sampler and the Novak curette prior to hysterectomy. The Z-sampler diagnosed 66 (82.5%) with endometrial cancer compared to 68 (85%) with the Novak curette (P = 0.724). The Z-sampler biopsies included 10 specimens (12.5%) pathologically inadequate for diagnosis, compared to 5 (6.3%) Novak curette biopsies inadequate for diagnosis (P = 0.074). When both endometrial biopsies were adequate for pathologic evaluation, the Z-sampler diagnosed 66 of 70 women (94.3%) with endometrial cancer, compared to 64 of 70 (91.4%) diagnosed with the Novak curette (P = 0.617). We did not demonstrate a significant difference in diagnostic accuracy or specimen adequacy between in-office biopsies taken with the Novak curette and those taken with the Z-sampler in patients with endometrial cancer.
本研究的目的是比较在子宫内膜癌患者中,使用诺瓦克刮匙和一次性柔性聚丙烯活检装置Z采样器进行门诊子宫内膜活检的诊断准确性和标本充足性。80例子宫内膜癌女性患者在子宫切除术前,分别使用Z采样器和诺瓦克刮匙进行了门诊子宫内膜活检。Z采样器诊断出66例(82.5%)患有子宫内膜癌,而诺瓦克刮匙诊断出68例(85%)(P = 0.724)。Z采样器活检中有10份标本(12.5%)病理诊断不充分,相比之下,诺瓦克刮匙活检中有5份(6.3%)诊断不充分(P = 0.074)。当两种子宫内膜活检标本均适合病理评估时,Z采样器诊断出70例女性中的66例(94.3%)患有子宫内膜癌,而诺瓦克刮匙诊断出70例中的64例(91.4%)(P = 0.617)。我们并未证明在子宫内膜癌患者中,使用诺瓦克刮匙进行的门诊活检与使用Z采样器进行的门诊活检在诊断准确性或标本充足性方面存在显著差异。