Histological Sampling of Endometrial Tissue: Comparison between the MedGyn® Endosampler and Formal Fractional Curettage in Patients with Abnormal Uterine Bleeding

BACKGROUND: Several methods have been used for evaluation of the endometrial pathology in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Endometrial biopsy is one of the primary methods used for diagnostic evaluation, which is a minimally invasive approach. The aim of this study was to compare the adequacy yield of samples obtained by MedGyn® Endosampler with Formal Fractional Curettage. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the endometrial tissue quality and diagnostic accuracy between MedGyn® Endosampler and Formal Fractional Curettage in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. METHODS: A total of 85 endometrial tissue samples were tested by the MedGyn® Endosampler, followed by Formal Fractional Curettage, from patients at Phrapokklao Hospital who were eligible for the study and met the inclusion criteria for uterine curettage. Samples were collected between August, 2018 and April, 2019. Both operations were performed by the same investigator. The samples were submitted separately and sent to the same pathologist. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 46.92 ± 6.94 years. 91.76% (78/85) of the samples obtained by Formal Fractional Curettage and 89.41% (76/85) of the samples obtained by MedGyn® Endosampler device were adequate for histopathological examination. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.317). The pathological results of endometrial tissue from both techniques were the same in 67 patients (78.82%) and different in 14 patients (16.47%). MedGyn® Endosampler was six times more cost effective when compared to Formal Fractional Curettage. CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial sampling using MedGyn® Endosampler is a safe, adequate, accurate, cost effective outpatient procedure which precludes general anesthesia. Therefore, it could be an alternative method for endometrial sampling.