|Year : 2021 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 206-210
Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring system in predicting endometrial malignancy and atypical endometrial hyperplasia
Bhukya Harika, Murali Subbaiah, Dilip Kumar Maurya
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, JIPMER, Puducherry, India
|Date of Submission||22-Oct-2020|
|Date of Decision||24-Jul-2021|
|Date of Acceptance||28-Aug-2021|
|Date of Web Publication||16-Oct-2021|
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, WCH Block, JIPMER, D. Nagar, Puducherry - 605 006
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
| Abstract|| |
Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of a hysteroscopic scoring system in predicting endometrial cancer and endometrial hyperplasia with atypia. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective study involving 95 peri and postmenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding who underwent hysteroscopic-guided endometrial biopsy. After the calculation of hysteroscopic score, biopsy was obtained and sent for histopathological examination. Hysteroscopic diagnosis of carcinoma endometrium was made when the total score was ≥16 and a score ≥7 supported a diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia with atypia. Results: Out of the 95 women, 46 (48.4%) women had postmenopausal bleeding. The mean age of women was 50.4 ± 10.3 years. Eight women were diagnosed to have endometrial cancer and eight had endometrial hyperplasia with atypia on histopathological examination. Using a hysteroscopy score ≥16, the sensitivity and specificity were found to be 62.5% and 90.8%, respectively, for diagnosing endometrial cancer. Hysteroscopy score ≥9 was found to be a better cutoff for diagnosing endometrial cancer using Youden index. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for diagnosing endometrial cancer with score ≥9 was 100%, 67.8%, 22.2%, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia with atypia with score ≥7 was found to be 75%, 58.6%, 14.3%, and 96.2%, respectively. Conclusion: The hysteroscopic scoring system has a good diagnostic performance when a cutoff score ≥9 is used in predicting endometrial cancer. However, the scoring system has lower diagnostic accuracy in predicting endometrial hyperplasia with atypia.
Keywords: Diagnostic hysteroscopy, endometrial cancer, endometrial hyperplasia with atypia, hysteroscopic scoring
|How to cite this article:|
Harika B, Subbaiah M, Maurya DK. Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring system in predicting endometrial malignancy and atypical endometrial hyperplasia. J Mid-life Health 2021;12:206-10
|How to cite this URL:|
Harika B, Subbaiah M, Maurya DK. Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring system in predicting endometrial malignancy and atypical endometrial hyperplasia. J Mid-life Health [serial online] 2021 [cited 2022 Jan 27];12:206-10. Available from: https://www.jmidlifehealth.org/text.asp?2021/12/3/206/328383
| Introduction|| |
Endometrial malignancy is one of the major causes of cancer-related mortality and morbidity in women. Although it predominantly affects postmenopausal women, up to 15%–20% of cases may be detected in premenopausal women. Hysteroscopic-guided endometrial biopsy is currently considered the gold standard in diagnosing endometrial pathology. It is considered superior to blind dilation and curettage, which can miss focal lesions in the endometrium.
Endometrial cancer can be suspected based on hysteroscopic appearance of the lesions., Hysteroscopic appearances of endometrial malignancy and hyperplasia have been described in several studies.,,, As hysteroscopy is a subjective diagnostic test, its accuracy depends on the experience of the physician performing it. A hysteroscopy-based scoring system has been recently described by Ianieri et al. This scoring system may be particularly useful to less experienced physicians in diagnosing endometrial cancer and hyperplasia. This scoring system has not been evaluated in any prospective study. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of this scoring system in predicting endometrial cancer and endometrial hyperplasia with atypia.
| Materials and Methods|| |
This is a prospective study conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at a Tertiary Care Hospital in India from January 2018 to July 2020. The study was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee for human studies (JIP/IEC/2018/0146). Informed consent was obtained from all the patients. Women ≥18 years with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) who required endometrial biopsy were included in the study. Exclusion criteria of the study were pregnancy, acute pelvic inflammatory disease, and diagnosis of pyometra on transvaginal ultrasound. Diagnostic hysteroscopy was done in the operation theater using a 2.9 mm rigid hysteroscope (Karl Storz, Germany) without any anesthesia. Vaginoscopic approach was used, and intrauterine pressure was maintained under 80 mmHg using a hysteromat. Vaginal misoprostol (200 μg) was instilled 2 h before the procedure. All the procedures were performed by an experienced consultant (with experience of diagnostic hysteroscopy in more than 500 women with AUB) who was blinded to the imaging findings including endometrial thickness. Hysteroscopic findings were documented, and the hysteroscopic score was calculated as described by Ianieri et al. The scoring system includes eight components: atypical vessels (score 7), widespread and irregular endometrial thickening (score 2), dilated glandular orifices (score 2), crumbling of endometrial neoplasm (score 6), multiple endometrial polyps (score 2), irregular aspect of the polyp (score 3), growth of cerebroid and arborescent aspects (score 14), and irregular endometrial color (score 4). The total score was calculated by adding all these scores. Hysteroscopic-guided biopsy was subsequently obtained using a 5F hysteroscopic biopsy forceps and sent for histopathological examination. Hysteroscopic diagnosis of carcinoma endometrium was made when the total score was ≥16 and a score ≥7 supported a diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia with atypia.
Statistical testing was performed using STATA software version 13.1 (STATA Corp., Texas USA). Continuous variables are presented as mean with the standard deviation and categorical variables as percentages. The diagnostic ability was assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). The area under the curve was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, to test the ability of hysteroscopic scoring in identifying women with endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia.
Assuming an α error of 5% with 95% confidence interval and expecting a sensitivity of 95% for diagnosing carcinoma endometrium with an absolute precision of 10%, the minimal sample size was calculated to be 95. This was with an assumption of the incidence of carcinoma endometrium to be 10% in the study population.
| Results|| |
A total of 98 women with AUB were assessed for eligibility and included in the study. Three women were excluded because of imaging findings of pyometra. The mean age of women who underwent hysteroscopy was 50.4 ± 10.3 years. Ninety-three (97.9%) of them had a parity ≥2. The mean BMI was 24.1 ± 2.9 kg/m2. Forty-six (48.4%) women had postmenopausal bleeding. The rest were premenopausal with AUB. The mean endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women was 9.49 ± 8.13 mm. There were no complications during hysteroscopy in any patient. Forty-two women (44.2%) had a score ≥7 and were suspected to have atypical endometrial hyperplasia; 13 women (13.7%) had a hysteroscopic score ≥16 and were suspected to have endometrial cancer. The final histopathological findings in the 95 women who underwent hysteroscopy are given in [Table 1]. Eight women (8.4%) were diagnosed to have endometrioid adenocarcinoma (Grade 1 in 5; Grade 3 in 3 women).
|Table 1: Histopathological findings in 95 women who underwent hysteroscopic guided biopsy|
Click here to view
Using a cutoff ≥16 for diagnosing endometrial cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of hysteroscopic scoring were found to be 62.5%, 90.8%, 38.5%, and 96.3%, respectively. Because of low sensitivity with this cutoff, Youden index was calculated to determine a better cutoff for diagnosing endometrial carcinoma. A cutoff score ≥9 had high sensitivity, with relatively good specificity when compared to other scores as given in [Table 2]. The Youden index J (0.678) for this cutoff was the highest. The diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring in detecting endometrial cancer using a cutoff score ≥9 is given in [Table 3]. The diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring in diagnosing atypical endometrial hyperplasia is also given in [Table 3].
|Table 2: Accuracy of hysteroscopic score at various cut off values using Youden index for diagnosing endometrial cancer|
Click here to view
|Table 3: Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopic scoring in detecting endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia|
Click here to view
| Discussion|| |
In this study, a hysteroscopic scoring system was prospectively evaluated in 95 women with AUB. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for diagnosing endometrial cancer with score ≥9 were 100%, 67.8%, 22.2%, and 100%, respectively. Using score ≥16 for diagnosing endometrial cancer resulted in poor sensitivity (62.5%). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia with atypia (score ≥7) were found to be 75%, 58.6%, 14.3%, and 96.2%, respectively.
Taking endometrial biopsy under hysteroscopic view has advantages over blind biopsy. Dilation and curettage done blindly can be miss focal lesions. On the other hand, hysteroscopic appearance permits an accurate macroscopic diagnosis of lesions and directed biopsy. A careful analysis of surface, color, vascular arrangement, and general appearance allows estimating the risk of malignancy and identifying sites for taking biopsies.
The hysteroscopic scoring system used in this study was developed to diagnose endometrial hyperplasia, atypical endometrial hyperplasia, and endometrial carcinoma. The authors retrospectively reviewed the videos of diagnostic hysteroscopies done in patients with normal endometrium, endometrial hyperplasia, and carcinoma. They evaluated several variables and developed this scoring system using an ordinal multivariate analysis. They hypothesized the scoring system to have a sensitivity and specificity of 95.4% and 98.2%, respectively, for endometrial carcinoma using a cutoff of score ≥16. The sensitivity and specificity were predicted to be 63.3% and 90.4%, respectively, for detecting atypical endometrial hyperplasia with a cutoff of score ≥7. The results of our prospective study indicate that this scoring system has a higher sensitivity (75%) but lower specificity (58.6%) in diagnosing atypical endometrial hyperplasia. However, the sensitivity of the scoring system (62.5%) with score ≥16 was found to be very low in our study for diagnosing endometrial carcinoma. A lower cutoff (Score ≥9) was found to have better diagnostic accuracy with 100% sensitivity and NPV for diagnosing endometrial carcinoma. However, at this cutoff, the specificity (67.8%) was lower.
We found that two components of the hysteroscopic scoring system with the highest scores (growth of cerebroid and arborescent aspects – score 14; crumbling of endometrial neoplasm score 6) were normal in many women with early-stage endometrial carcinoma. This could explain the low sensitivity to diagnose endometrial carcinoma with score ≥16.
Endometrial hyperplasia is one of the common causes of AUB and can lead to endometrial carcinoma if left untreated. In 2014, the WHO suggested a new classification of endometrial hyperplasia: (1) nonatypical endometrial hyperplasia and (2) atypical endometrial hyperplasia or endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia. Up to 59% of patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia may have coexistent invasive endometrial carcinoma. Hysteroscopic scoring system was found to have good sensitivity (75%) and NPV (96.2%) in detecting atypical endometrial hyperplasia in our study. Ianieri et al. have suggested a hysteroscopy score ≥2 to diagnose nonatypical endometrial hyperplasia with a predicted sensitivity of 48.7%. Because of this poor sensitivity, we did not use this scoring system to diagnose nonatypical endometrial hyperplasia in this study. Further, they have a very low risk of coexistent invasive carcinoma and will regress once the endocrine milieu has been normalized.
Dueholm et al. developed another hysteroscopic scoring system for use in women with postmenopausal bleeding. They evaluated visual patterns in hysteroscopy in women with postmenopausal bleeding who had an endometrium thickness >5 mm and developed a hysteroscopic cancer scoring using multivariate logistic regression. It includes seven components: irregular surface, papillary projections, “candy floss” necrosis, surface necrosis, white hyperintense spots, irregular distribution of irregular vessels, and irregular branching vessels. A score of 1 is given for each component. A total score ≥3 suggests a diagnosis of endometrial cancer with a sensitivity of 89% with a specificity of 92%. No prospective studies have evaluated this scoring system. We did not use this scoring system in our study as we had both premenopausal and postmenopausal women in our cohort.
Strengths of the study
This is the first prospective study to evaluate a hysteroscopic scoring system. To eliminate observer bias, the consultant who did hysteroscopy was blinded to imaging findings such as endometrial thickness.
Limitations of the study
The demerit of the study is its relatively small sample size. Further, the reproducibility of the score and interobserver bias was not assessed. This could have been done by video recording of the procedure and calculation of hysteroscopic score by another consultant.
| Conclusion|| |
The hysteroscopic scoring system displayed a good diagnostic performance when a cutoff score ≥9 was used in predicting endometrial malignancy. However, the scoring system had lower diagnostic accuracy in predicting atypical endometrial hyperplasia.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Lortet-Tieulent J, Ferlay J, Bray F, Jemal A. International patterns and trends in endometrial cancer incidence, 1978-2013. J Natl Cancer Inst 2018;110:354-61.
Suri V, Arora A. Management of endometrial cancer: A review. Rev Recent Clin Trials 2015;10:309-16.
The use of hysteroscopy for the diagnosis and treatment of intrauterine pathology: ACOG committee opinion, number 800. Obstet Gynecol 2020;135:e138-48.
Epstein E, Ramirez A, Skoog L, Valentin L. Dilatation and curettage fails to detect most focal lesions in the uterine cavity in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001;80:1131-6.
Clark TJ, Voit D, Gupta JK, Hyde C, Song F, Khan KS. Accuracy of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: A systematic quantitative review. JAMA 2002;288:1610-21.
Gkrozou F, Dimakopoulos G, Vrekoussis T, Lavasidis L, Koutlas A, Navrozoglou I, et al.
Hysteroscopy in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: A meta-analysis on four major endometrial pathologies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015;291:1347-54.
Sugimoto O. Hysteroscopic diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. A report of fifty-three cases examined at the Women's Clinic of Kyoto University Hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1975;121:105-13.
Garuti G, Cellani F, Garzia D, Colonnelli M, Luerti M. Accuracy of hysteroscopic diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia: A retrospective study of 323 patients. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2005;12:247-53.
De Franciscis P, Riemma G, Schiattarella A, Cobellis L, Guadagno M, Vitale SG, et al.
Concordance between the hysteroscopic diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia and histopathological examination. Diagnostics (Basel) 2019;9:E142.
Tinelli R, Surico D, Leo L, Pinto V, Surico N, Fusco A, et al.
Accuracy and efficacy of narrow-band imaging versus white light hysteroscopy for the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: A multicenter controlled study. Menopause 2011;18:1026-9.
De Marchi F, Fabris AM, Tommasi L, Nappi L, Saccardi C, Litta P. Accuracy of hysteroscopy made by young residents in detecting endometrial pathologies in postmenopausal women. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2014;35:219-23.
Ianieri MM, Staniscia T, Pontrelli G, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Manzi FS, Recchi M, et al
. A new hysteroscopic risk scoring system for diagnosing endometrial hyperplasia and adenocarcinoma. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2016;23:712-8.
Bourdel N, Modaffari P, Tognazza E, Pertile R, Chauvet P, Botchorishivili R, et al.
Does experience in hysteroscopy improve accuracy and inter-observer agreement in the management of abnormal uterine bleeding? Surg Endosc 2016;30:5558-64.
Sobczuk K, Sobczuk A. New classification system of endometrial hyperplasia WHO 2014 and its clinical implications. Prz Menopauzalny 2017;16:107-11.
Antonsen SL, Ulrich L, Høgdall C. Patients with atypical hyperplasia of the endometrium should be treated in oncological centers. Gynecol Oncol 2012;125:124-8.
Dueholm M, Hjorth IM, Secher P, Jørgensen A, Ørtoft G. Structured hysteroscopic evaluation of endometrium in women with postmenopausal bleeding. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015;22:1215-24.
[Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]