J. Antoni et al., COMPARISON OF CYTOSPAT AND PIPELLE ENDOMETRIAL BIOPSY INSTRUMENTS, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, 72(1), 1997, pp. 57-61
Objective: To compare two endometrial biopsy techniques, based on the
quality of material obtained, cost effectiveness, and pain during the
procedure. Study design: A single blind, randomized prospective study.
Results: A total of 365 women with peri/postmenopausal bleeding were
randomized into two groups: 174 biopsied with cytospat (C) and 191 bio
psied with pipelle (P). Both procedures were then followed by either d
ilatation and curettage (D&C) or hysterectomy. Pain was evaluated in 3
79 patients, with the result being better tolerance for P vs. C (3.55
vs. 4.06, P = 0.07). With C, the sensitivity in histological evaluatio
n was 82% for benign endometrium, 60% for endometrial hyperplasia and
60% for corpus uterine neoplasia as compared to the D&C and hysterecto
my material. With P the sensitivity was 84, 71 and 60%, respectively f
or the three diagnoses, as compared to the D&C and hysterectomy materi
al. Insufficient tissue for pathologic evaluation was present in 24% o
f C, 25% of P and 9.8% of D&C samples. Conclusions: Cost effectiveness
for pipelle is slightly higher than for Cytospat. (C) 1997 Elsevier S
cience Ireland Ltd.