Utility of Pipet Curet Cytology and Biopsy as a Diagnostic Method for Endometrial Endometrioid Carcinoma.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Karger Country of Publication: Switzerland NLM ID: 0370307 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1938-2650 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00015547 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Acta Cytol Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: 2011- : Basel : Karger
      Original Publication: Chicago : International Academy of Cytology
    • Subject Terms:
      Carcinoma, Endometrioid*/pathology ; Carcinoma, Endometrioid*/diagnosis ; Endometrial Neoplasms*/pathology ; Endometrial Neoplasms*/diagnosis ; Cytodiagnosis*/methods; Humans ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Aged ; Adult ; Biopsy ; Neoplasm Grading ; Aged, 80 and over ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Reproducibility of Results ; Endometrium/pathology
    • Abstract:
      Introduction: We aimed to determine the utility of Pipet Curet cytology (PCC) and Pipet Curet biopsy (PCB) for diagnosing uterine endometrial endometrioid carcinoma (EEC).
      Methods: We divided 77 patients with EEC into two groups per Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grades: G1 (n = 44) and G2/3 (n = 33) and compared the diagnostic sensitivity of PCC, PCB, and PCC and PCB combined, retrospectively. Next, we investigated any diagnostic discordance between PCC-based and PCB-based diagnoses per FIGO grade group.
      Results: The diagnostic sensitivity of PCC, PCB, and the two modalities combined was significantly higher for G2/3 EECs than for G1 EECs (72.7% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.0209; 84.8% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.0434; and 93.9% vs. 65.9%, p = 0.0046, respectively), likely due to more friable cancer cells in higher grade EEC cases. Among our 77 EEC patients, there were 4 patients (5.19%) with PCC-based concordant but PCB-based discordant results against EEC, in the G2/3 group predominantly. Diagnostic sensitivity of all cases increased from 72.7% (56/77) by PCB alone to 77.9% (60/77) by use of both modalities combined.
      Conclusion: Cytologic evaluation can reduce the number of false-negative histologic diagnoses. By providing complementary information, the two modalities combined from the Pipet Curet procedure would be valuable as a diagnostic method for EEC.
      (© 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel.)
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Cytology; Endometrial endometrioid carcinoma; FIGO grade; Histology; Pipet Curet
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240905 Date Completed: 20241105 Latest Revision: 20241105
    • Publication Date:
      20241106
    • Accession Number:
      10.1159/000541279
    • Accession Number:
      39236701