AI Article Synopsis

  • - The study compares the effectiveness of different devices (curette, brush, and a combination of both) in collecting samples during endocervical curettage (ECC) following inadequate colposcopy or abnormal Pap results.
  • - A total of 300 women participated, with results showing that the curette and combined methods produced more adequate samples than the brush alone, but all methods were equally effective in detecting cervical precancer (CIN2+).
  • - The findings suggested that while curette and combination methods are more efficient in sample collection, factors like age and parity did not significantly impact the sample quality or the ability to detect CIN2+.

Article Abstract

Introduction: Endocervical curetting (ECC) is mandatory when colposcopy is inadequate or when the Pap smear suggests glandular lesion. When the curette is used, ECC is painful; this necessitated the development of the endocervical brush. There is no consensus on which device yields more sample, detects true cervical precancer (CIN2+) better or highlights the effects of age and parity on ECC yield.

Objective: To compare ECC yield and the ability to pick up CIN2+ by the different devices and effect of parity and age on yield.

Method: Three hundred women referred for colposcopy following positive cervical high-risk HPV DNA test who had inadequate colposcopic examination were randomly allocated to curette, brush and curette and brush groups for ECC. All samples were sent for histology, and the results were compared.

Result: Of the 300 women, 103, 100 and 97 had ECC with curette, brush and curette and brush, respectively. Samples were adequate in 92 (89.3%) of the curette, 69 (69.0%) of the brush and 78 (80.4%) of the curette and brush groups. The curette and curette and brush yielded more samples ( = 0.00) and ( = 0.04), respectively, compared with the brush, but there was no difference in yield between curette and curette and brush ( = 0.06). However, there was no difference in the yield of CIN2+ between the sampling devices. Age and parity had no effect on the sample adequacy by the different devices.

Conclusion: Curette and the curette and brush yielded more samples compared with the brush alone. However, CIN2+ pick-up was similar across all sampling devices.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10616047PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13224-023-01758-8DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

curette brush
32
curette
13
sampling devices
12
brush
12
curette curette
12
endocervical curetting
8
age parity
8
brush curette
8
brush groups
8
brush yielded
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!