ArticleChinese medical journal2015
Combining endometrium sampling device and SurePath preparation to screen for endometrial carcinoma: a validation study.
Article in Chinese medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometrial Cytology in Diagnosis of Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Current role of Pipelle endometrial sampling in early diagnosis of endometrial cancer.Translational cancer research · 2020Review
- An Efficacious Endometrial Sampler for Screening Endometrial Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Validation of Molecular Typing for Endometrial Screening Test That Predicts Benign and Malignant Lesions.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Article
- Endometrial sampling devices for early diagnosis of endometrial lesions.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2016Review
- Role of Liquid-based Cytology and Cell Block in the Diagnosis of Endometrial Lesions.Chinese medical journal · 2016Article
- Screening of Endometrial Cancer Related to Lynch Syndrome in China by Suction Curettage-Based Cytology and Histology: A Retrospective Study.Journal of cytologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare specimen adequacy of SAP-1 provided for cytology with that of dilation and curettage (D & C) or hysteroscopy for histology, and evaluate the accuracy of combining endometrium sampling by SAP-1 and liquid-based cytology using SurePath preparation for screening endometrial carcinoma and its precursor.
methodsEndometrial specimens from women (n = 1514) with risk factors were obtained using an SAP-1 device for cytological analysis; histological samples were obtained from 375 of these women who underwent D & C or hysteroscopy. Cytological specimens were prepared to liquid-based smear using SurePath technology and stained by Papanicolaou. Histological samples were processed in routine pathology and stained by hematoxylin and eosin.
resultsAdequate specimens for cytology were obtained from 1458/1541 patients (96.3%), while adequate samples for pathology were obtained from 285/375 patients (76%). However, for postmenopausal women, 1006 of 1045 cytology (86.3%) were adequate, 153 of 238 histology (64.3%) were adequate, it was easier to collect cytological specimens than histological specimens (P < 0.05). The accuracy of endometrial cytology for detecting endometrial carcinoma and its precursor was 92.4% (sensitivity, 73%; specificity, 95.8%; positive predictive value, 75%; and negative predictive value, 95.3%).
conclusionsEndometrial cytology using SAP-1 sampling and SurePath preparation may be a reliable approach for screening patients with endometrial carcinoma and its precursor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.