Agreement Between Preoperative Endometrial Sampling and Surgical Specimen Findings in Endometrial Carcinoma

被引:25
|
作者
Garcia, Tiago Selbach [1 ]
Appel, Marcia [2 ]
Rivero, Raquel [3 ]
Kliemann, Lucia [3 ]
Osorio Wender, Maria Celeste [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Postgrad Program Med Sci, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[2] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, Gynecol Oncol Unit, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Rio Grande do Sul, Dept Pathol, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
[4] Hosp Clin Porto Alegre, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
关键词
Endometrial neoplasms; Endometrial biopsy; Tumor grade; Agreement; Accuracy; D-AND-C; FIGO GRADE; CANCER; BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; ACCURACY; TUMOR; LYMPHADENECTOMY; REPRODUCIBILITY; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1097/IGC.0000000000000922
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objectives: The aims of the study were to evaluate agreement between preoperative endometrial samples and surgical specimens in endometrial carcinoma and to correlate this agreement with sample and patient characteristics. Methods: Patients who received primary surgical treatment for endometrial carcinoma at a tertiary care center and had undergone preoperative endometrial sampling were included. Medical records were reviewed to collect information from pathology reports and data on patient characteristics. Results: The study sample comprised 166 patients (mean age, 64.6 years). The histological results of the biopsies were the following: endometrioid cancer (n = 118), nonendometrioid tumor (n = 38), and hyperplasia (n = 10). The agreement rates were 93.2% for endometrioid and 68.9% for nonendometrioid tumors, with a kappa coefficient of 0.73 for tumor cell type. Tumor International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) grade was distributed as follows: 37.1% G1, 35.7% G2, and 27.1% G3, with agreement rates of 61.5%, 56%, and 78.9%, respectively. The overall kappa coefficient for FIGO grading was 0.46. Only 1.9% of the tumors originally classified as G1 were upgraded to G3, whereas 16% of G2 lesions were upgraded. There was no significant difference in agreement rates for tumor cell type and FIGO grade in relation to any of the studied variables, except that biopsy specimens weighing more than 3 g had significantly better agreement in FIGO grading (P = 0.040). Conclusions: Preoperative biopsy has suboptimal accuracy for prediction of characteristics in the definitive surgical specimen. Caution must be taken when using preoperative information to determine extent of surgical resection, due to the risk of understaging. Additional information must be combined with the biopsy data to help in the decision-making process.
引用
收藏
页码:473 / 478
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Preoperative sampling in endometrial cancer: evaluation of the histopathological agreement with definitive surgical specimen
    Raquel Quintana-Bertó
    Pablo Padilla-Iserte
    Antonio Gil-Moreno
    Reyes Oliver-Pérez
    Pluvio J. Coronado
    María Belén Martín-Salamanca
    Manuel Pantoja-Garrido
    Cristina Lorenzo
    Duska Beric
    Juan Gilabert-Estellés
    Lourdes Sánchez
    Fernando Roldán-Rivas
    Berta Díaz-Feijoo
    José Ramón Rodríguez-Hernández
    Josefina Marcos-Sanmartin
    Juan Carlos Muruzábal
    Antonio Cañada
    Santiago Domingo
    Clinical and Translational Oncology, 2022, 24 : 2388 - 2394
  • [2] Preoperative sampling in endometrial cancer: evaluation of the histopathological agreement with definitive surgical specimen
    Quintana-Berto, Raquel
    Padilla-Iserte, Pablo
    Gil-Moreno, Antonio
    Oliver-Perez, Reyes
    Coronado, Pluvio J.
    Belen Martin-Salamanca, Maria
    Pantoja-Garrido, Manuel
    Lorenzo, Cristina
    Beric, Duska
    Gilabert-Estelles, Juan
    Sanchez, Lourdes
    Roldan-Rivas, Fernando
    Diaz-Feijoo, Berta
    Ramon Rodriguez-Hernandez, Jose
    Marcos-Sanmartin, Josefina
    Carlos Muruzabal, Juan
    Canada, Antonio
    Domingo, Santiago
    CLINICAL & TRANSLATIONAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 24 (12): : 2388 - 2394
  • [3] Endometrial carcinoma with "previous inadequate specimen sampling" in endometrial biopsy
    Blasco, Ana
    Yebenes, Laura
    Olmedilla, Gabriel
    Ramos, Paloma
    Valenzuela, Pedro
    Ruiz, Antonio
    VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 2007, 451 (02) : 402 - 403
  • [4] Correlation of endometrial pathology between hysterectomy and preoperative endometrial sampling
    Ji, H
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2006, 86 : 182A - 183A
  • [5] Correlation of endometrial pathology between hysterectomy and preoperative endometrial sampling
    Ji, H
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2006, 19 : 182A - 183A
  • [6] Discrepancy between preoperative endometrial sampling and hysterectomy diagnosis in endometrial cancer
    Mhlongo, Sanele E.
    Naidoo, Thinagrin D.
    Makhathini, Bongumusa S.
    SOUTHERN AFRICAN JOURNAL OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 12 (01) : 13 - 16
  • [7] Correlation between preoperative endometrial sampling and final endometrial cancer histology
    Sany, O.
    Singh, K.
    Jha, S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2012, 33 (02) : 142 - 144
  • [8] Preoperative and Postoperative Agreement of Histopathological Findings in Cases of Endometrial Hyperplasia
    Kleebkaow, Pilaiwan
    Maneetab, Sumathana
    Somboonporn, Woraluk
    Seejorn, Kanok
    Thinkhamrop, Jedsada
    Komwilaisak, Ratana
    ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION, 2008, 9 (01) : 89 - 91
  • [9] Assessment of Preoperative Endometrial Histopathological Sampling as a Predictor of Final Surgical Pathology in Endometrial Cancer
    Silveira Bueno Piotto, Mario Augusto
    de Azevedo Focchi, Gustavo Rubino
    Marques, Renato Moretti
    Severino Teixeira, Andressa Melina
    Goncalves, Wagner Jose
    Nicolau, Sergio Mancini
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRICIA, 2020, 42 (10): : 642 - 648
  • [10] Preoperative radiotherapy and surgery for endometrial carcinoma:: Prognostic significance of the sterilization of the specimen
    Maingon, P
    Arnould, L
    Magnin, V
    Collin, F
    Belichard, C
    Fraisse, J
    Barillot, I
    D'Hombres, A
    Bône-Lepinoy, MC
    Padeano, MM
    Douvier, S
    Cuisenier, J
    Horiot, JC
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1998, 41 (03): : 551 - 557