A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of endometrial sampling tests for detecting endometrial cancer

Author:

Sakna NohaORCID,Elgendi MarwaORCID,Salama MohamedORCID,Zeinhom Ahmed,Labib SomiaORCID,Nabhan AshrafORCID

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesto determine the diagnostic accuracy of different endometrial sampling tests for detecting endometrial carcinoma.Designa systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of diagnostic accuracy.Eligibility criteriaWe included published diagnostic test accuracy studies of women, of all ages, who had an endometrial sampling for preoperatively detecting endometrial cancer with verification using histopathology of hysterectomy specimens as the reference standard. We excluded case control and case series studies.Information sourcesWe searched the Cochrane library, MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus from the date of inception of the databases to January 18, 2023. We did not apply any restrictions on language or date of publication. We searched the references of included studies and other systematic reviews.Risk of biasWe extracted study data and assessed study quality using the revised quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2).Synthesis of resultsWe used bivariate diagnostic random-effects meta-analysis and presented the results in a summary receiver operating characteristic curve. We assessed the certainty of evidence as recommended by the GRADE approach.ResultsTwelve included studies, published between 1986 and 2022, recruited 1607 participants. Seven studies were low risk of bias in all domains and all studies had low applicability concerns. The most examined index tests were Pipelle and conventional dilation and curettage. For diagnosing endometrial carcinoma, the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio (95% confidence intervals), for Pipelle were 0.774 (0.565, 0.900), 0.985 (0.927, 0.997), 97.000 (14.000, 349.000), and 0.241 (0.101, 0.442)and for conventional dilation and curettage were 0.773 (0.333, 0.959), 0.987 (0.967, 0.995), 62.300 (18.600, 148.000), and 0.268 (0.042, 0.676); respectively.ConclusionHigh certainty evidence indicates that pre-operative endometrial sampling particularly using Pipelle or conventional curettage is accurate in diagnosing endometrial cancer. Studies assessing other endometrial sampling tests were sparse.Systematic review registrationCenter for Open Science, osf.io/h8e9z

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference46 articles.

1. Global, Regional, and National Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life-Years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017;JAMA Oncology [Internet],2019

2. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries;CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians [Internet],2018

3. ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines for the management of patients with endometrial carcinoma;Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology,2021

4. Cancer of the corpus uteri: 2021 update;International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics,2021

5. Cancer statistics, 2019;CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians [Internet],2019

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3