ArticleCureus2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of Endometrial Sampling Methods for Determining Histologic Type and Grade in Endometrial Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccurate preoperative diagnosis of histologic subtype and tumor grade is essential for optimal treatment planning. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of endometrial sampling and compared it with hysteroscopy, dilation and curettage (D&C), and Pipelle biopsy in identifying the histologic subtype and tumor grade of endometrial carcinoma. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective, single-center study analyzed data from 188 women with endometrial carcinoma who underwent primary hysterectomy following initial endometrial sampling at Galilee Medical Center (2010-2024). Patients were categorized by sampling method, and histologic concordance with final hysterectomy specimens was evaluated using Kappa statistics.
resultsOverall, histologic concordance for endometrial sampling for determining histologic type and grade in endometrial cancer was 83%. Hysteroscopy showed the highest accuracy for histologic subtype (91%) and tumor grading (76.9%), followed by D&C and Pipelle biopsy. Kappa analysis revealed moderate concordance for hysteroscopy (κ = 0.729) and D&C (κ = 0.731), with Pipelle biopsy showing weaker concordance (κ = 0.441). Hysteroscopy was significantly more accurate than Pipelle in detecting tumor grade (p = 0.017).
conclusionEndometrial sampling is moderately accurate for determining histologic type and grade in endometrial cancer. Hysteroscopy offers the highest precision for preoperative diagnosis, particularly in assessing histologic type and grade, supporting its role as the preferred diagnostic method. Future studies integrating molecular markers with histologic evaluation hold promise for improving diagnostic accuracy and optimizing treatment outcomes.
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.