Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hysteroscopy in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a meta-analysis on four major endometrial pathologies

  • General Gynecology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the accuracy of hysteroscopy in diagnosing endometrial cancer, hyperplasia, polyps and submucous myomas.

Methods

Relevant articles were retrieved from the MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (1986–2011). Studies were selected blindly. Results for diagnostic accuracy were extracted to form separate 2 × 2 tables (for endometrial cancer, hyperplasia, polyps and submucous myomas). A summary sensitivity and specificity point reflected the average accuracy observed. Summary ROCs (SROCs) were also calculated according to the HSROC model.

Results

For endometrial cancer, the estimated sensitivity was 82.6 % (95 % CR 66.9–91.8 %) and the specificity was 99.7 % (95 % CR 98.1–99.9 %). For endometrial hyperplasia, sensitivity was 75.2 % (95 % CR 55.4–88.1 %), while specificity was 91.5 % (95 % CR 85.7–95.0 %). For endometrial polyps, sensitivity was 95.4 % (95 % CR 87.4–98.4 %) and specificity was 96.4 % (95 % CR 93.7–98.0 %). Finally, for submucous myomas, sensitivity was estimated to 97.0 % (95 % CR 89.8–99.2 %) and specificity to 98.9 % (95 % CR 93.3–99.8 %).

Conclusions

Diagnostic accuracy for hysteroscopy is high for endometrial cancer, polyps and submucous myomas, but only moderate for endometrial hyperplasia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kebaili S, Dhouib M, Chaabane K, Chtioui A, Amouri H et al (2010) Exploration of post-menopausal uterine bleeding. Hysteroscopy-histology correlation in 94 cases. Sante 20:99–104

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Patil SG, Bhute SB, Inamdar SA, Acharya NS, Shrivastava DS (2009) Role of diagnostic hysteroscopy in abnormal uterine bleeding and its histopathologic correlation. J Gynecol Endosc Surg 1:98–104

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Torre A, Pouly JL, Wainer B (2010) Anatomic evaluation of the female of the infertile couple. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 39:S34–S44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tandulwadkar S, Deshmukh P, Lodha P, Agarwal B (2009) Hysteroscopy in postmenopausal bleeding. J Gynecol Endosc Surg 1:89–93

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhu HL, Liang XD, Wang JL, Cui H, Wei LH (2012) Hysteroscopy and directed biopsy in the diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Chin Med J (Engl) 123:3524–3528

    Google Scholar 

  6. Agostini A, Collette E, Provansal M, Estrade JP, Blanc B et al (2008) Good practice and accuracy of office hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 37(Suppl 8):S343–S348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fatemi HM, Kasius JC, Timmermans A, van Disseldorp J, Fauser BC et al (2010) Prevalence of unsuspected uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by office hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 25:1959–1965

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Koskas M, Mergui JL, Yazbeck C, Uzan S, Nizard J (2010) Office hysteroscopy for infertility: a series of 557 consecutive cases. Obstet Gynecol Int 2010:168096

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lasmar RB, Barrozo PR, Parente RC, Lasmar BP, da Rosa DB et al (2010) Hysteroscopic evaluation in patients with infertility. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 32:393–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Madan SM, Al-Jufairi ZA (2001) Abnormal uterine bleeding. Diagnostic value of hysteroscopy. Saudi Med J 22:153–156

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Neis KJ, Hepp H (1986) The accuracy of combined hysteroscopy and line biopsy under ambulatory conditions. Acta Eur Fertil 17:445–448

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Angioni S, Loddo A, Milano F, Piras B, Minerba L et al (2008) Detection of benign intracavitary lesions in postmenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a prospective comparative study on outpatient hysteroscopy and blind biopsy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:87–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ben-Yehuda OM, Kim YB, Leuchter RS (1998) Does hysteroscopy improve upon the sensitivity of dilatation and curettage in the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia or carcinoma? Gynecol Oncol 68:4–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bocanera AR, Roncoroni EC, Schlaen I, Ben J, Monteverde R et al (1994) An articulated rotating brush for office endometrial evaluation of climacteric outpatients. Maturitas 19:67–76

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Deckardt R, Lueken RP, Gallinat A, Moller CP, Busche D et al (2002) Comparison of transvaginal ultrasound, hysteroscopy, and dilatation and curettage in the diagnosis of abnormal vaginal bleeding and intrauterine pathology in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 9:277–282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Epstein E, Ramirez A, Skoog L, Valentin L (2001) Transvaginal sonography, saline contrast sonohysterography and hysteroscopy for the investigation of women with postmenopausal bleeding and endometrium >5 mm. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 18:157–162

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Haller H, Matecjcic N, Rukavina B, Krasevic M, Rupcic S et al (1996) Transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 54:155–159

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Krampl E, Bourne T, Hurlen-Solbakken H, Istre O (2001) Transvaginal ultrasonography sonohysterography and operative hysteroscopy for the evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 80:616–622

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lasmar RB, Barrozo PR, de Oliveira MA, Coutinho ES, Dias R (2006) Validation of hysteroscopic view in cases of endometrial hyperplasia and cancer in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 13:409–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Loizzi V, Bettocchi S, Vimercati A, Ceci O, Rossi C et al (2000) Hysteroscopic evaluation of menopausal women with endometrial thickness of 4 mm or more. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 7:191–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Loverro G, Bettocchi S, Cormio G, Nicolardi V, Greco P et al (1999) Transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy in postmenopausal uterine bleeding. Maturitas 33:139–144

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Loverro G, Bettocchi S, Cormio G, Nicolardi V, Porreca MR et al (1996) Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy in endometrial hyperplasia. Maturitas 25:187–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schwarzler P, Concin H, Bosch H, Berlinger A, Wohlgenannt K et al (1998) An evaluation of sonohysterography and diagnostic hysteroscopy for the assessment of intrauterine pathology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 11:337–342

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vercellini P, Cortesi I, Oldani S, Moschetta M, De Giorgi O et al (1997) The role of transvaginal ultrasonography and outpatient diagnostic hysteroscopy in the evaluation of patients with menorrhagia. Hum Reprod 12:1768–1771

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Widrich T, Bradley LD, Mitchinson AR, Collins RL (1996) Comparison of saline infusion sonography with office hysteroscopy for the evaluation of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:1327–1334

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Elewa AM, Ramadan MA, Abd El Karim MA, Abd El Hai MA, Saad SA (2001) Correlation of vaginal ultrasound and hysteroscopy with endometrial histopathology in postmenopausal women. Mid East Fert Soc J 6:26–33

    Google Scholar 

  27. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ et al (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 155:529–536

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B (1993) Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 12:1293–1316

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Deeks JJ (2001) Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ 323:157–162

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM et al (2005) Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 58:982–990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA (2001) A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med 20:2865–2884

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Macaskill P, Gatsonis CA, Deeks JJ, Harbord RM, Takwoingi Y (2010) Chapter 10: Analysing and Presenting Results. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Gatsonis CA (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, Version 1. The Cochrane Collaboration

  33. Harbord RM, Deeks JJ, Egger M, Whiting P, Sterne JA (2007) A unification of models for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Biostatistics 8:239–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM (2008) We should not pool diagnostic likelihood ratios in systematic reviews. Stat Med 27:687–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Begg CB, Mazumdar M (1994) Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 50:1088–1101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JA (2006) A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Stat Med 25:3443–3457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L (2006) Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA 295:676–680

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Clark TJ, Voit D, Gupta JK, Hyde C, Song F et al (2002) Accuracy of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: a systematic quantitative review. JAMA 288:1610–1621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Elfayomy AK, Habib FA, Alkabalawy MA (2011) Role of hysteroscopy in the detection of endometrial pathologies in women presenting with postmenopausal bleeding and thickened endometrium. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285:839–843

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. van Dongen H, de Kroon CD, Jacobi CE, Trimbos JB, Jansen FW (2007) Diagnostic hysteroscopy in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 114:664–675

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. de Kroon CD, de Bock GH, Dieben SW, Jansen FW (2003) Saline contrast hysterosonography in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 110:938–947

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Smith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K, Feldstein VA, Subak L, Scheidler J et al (1998) Endovaginal ultrasound to exclude endometrial cancer and other endometrial abnormalities. JAMA 280:1510–1517

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bingol B, Gunenc MZ, Gedikbasi A, Guner H, Tasdemir S et al (2010) Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy in postmenopausal bleeding. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284:111–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Soguktas S, Cogendez E, Kayatas SE, Asoglu MR, Selcuk S et al (2011) Comparison of saline infusion sonohysterography and hysteroscopy in diagnosis of premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 161:66–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical School, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece

    Fani Gkrozou, George Dimakopoulos, Thomas Vrekoussis, Lazaros Lavasidis, Anastasios Koutlas, Iordanis Navrozoglou, Theodore Stefos & Minas Paschopoulos

Authors
  1. Fani Gkrozou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George Dimakopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Vrekoussis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lazaros Lavasidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anastasios Koutlas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Iordanis Navrozoglou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Theodore Stefos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Minas Paschopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minas Paschopoulos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gkrozou, F., Dimakopoulos, G., Vrekoussis, T. et al. Hysteroscopy in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a meta-analysis on four major endometrial pathologies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291, 1347–1354 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3585-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3585-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation