Endometrial assessment re‐visited

C. Spencer,M. Whitehead

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08358.x

1999-07-01

British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Abstract:Approximately one-third of all gynaecological consultations are related to abnormal vaginal bleeding, and this proportion rises to 70% in the periand postmenopausal years. Most gynaecologists agree that abnormal vaginal bleeding after the age of 40 years requires further evaluation to exclude the presence of endometrial polyps, hyperplasia, fibroids or carcinoma. Younger women may also need endometrial investigations if abnormal bleeding does not rapidly resolve with the oral contraceptive pill or prostaglandin synthetase inhibitors. In certain conditions, such as the polycystic ovary syndrome in which endometrial hyperplasia is more common, endometrial assessment may be necessary if abnormal bleeding is a presenting feature, or unusual sonographic endometrial appearances are discovered. Traditionally, the standard method of assessing the endometrium has been with dilatation of the cervix and curettage of the uterine cavity under general anaesthesia. The frequency of this procedure varies worldwide. For example, the annual rate in 1989 in the United States was 10/10,000 women, whereas in England it was 71 -1/10,000 women'. Presumably, this difference is due to more outpatient procedures being performed as technology in this field advances and reduction in costs is achieved by the avoidance of inpatient investigation. In this review article we have attempted to summarise the relevant information relating to the use of several methods of assessing the endometrium. A literature search using the MEDLINE database (1976-1998) was performed using the MeSH headings: transvaginal ultrasound, hysteroscopy, endometrial biopsy and endornetrial cytology. Reference lists of the articles identified were hand searched to provide additional publications. A total of 142 citations were found using these methods.