Observational studyArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023
Hysteroscopic versus histopathological agreement in the diagnosis of chronic endometritis: results from a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of CD138 plasma cell severity on IVF-ET outcomes in women with untreated chronic endometritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence, Deep Learning, and Computer Vision in Hysteroscopy: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Chronic endometritis diagnosis and fertility outcomes: an old unresolved question.Reproduction & fertility · 2025Article
- The pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic endometritis: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
- Correlation of hysteroscopic findings of chronic endometritis with CD138 immunohistochemistry and their correlation with pregnancy outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Observational
- Endometrial congestion is the only hysteroscopic finding indicative of chronic endometritis.PloS one · 2024Observational
- International Expert Consensus Statement on Chronic Endometritis: A Comprehensive Literature Review and Modified e-Delphi Study.Reproductive medicine and biologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the agreement rate between hysteroscopy and pathological examination in case of chronic endometritis.
methodsA retrospective observational study carried out at Gynecology and Obstetrics Department, Puerta de Hierro Hospital, Autónoma University of Madrid, Spain, from January 2021 to June 2022 was performed by obtaining data from 115 medical records of women who underwent office hysteroscopies that was compared with the findings of final histological examination of endometrial biopsy. Cohen's kappa index was used to evaluate this agreement rate. In addition, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy were obtained.
resultsThe agreement between hysteroscopic findings and histological examination showed a modest result with a Cohen's kappa index of 34%. In addition, we obtained a specificity of 70% and a sensitivity of 64%. The positive and negative predictive value were 60.8% and 73.4%, respectively. An excellent agreement rate (100%) between histological and hysteroscopic results was observed in presence of hyperemia and micropolyps.
conclusionAlthough the sample size is not as large as that of other studies published so far, the first glance of our experience is that hysteroscopic signs are not yet sufficient to make an accurate diagnosis of chronic endometritis, thus requiring a histopathological confirmation to make it.
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.