Introduction/Background To assess the agreement for histology and grading, between endometrial biopsy and final diagnosis in patients with endometrial cancer, performed with different biopsy techniques.

Methodology We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with endometrial cancer and we collected demographic and clinical data, type of endometrial biopsy technique (Dilation & Curettage - D&C, diagnostic hysteroscopy and subsequent D&C, office hysteroscopy and operative hysteroscopy), biopsy and final diagnosis pathological characteristics. We evaluated global agreement for histology and grading using Cohen's Kappa and we performed subgroup analysis based on the biopsy technique and final grading. Agreement was classified in a five stepfashion way ranging from good, moderate, sufficient, fair and poor.

Results We found 148 patients. Final histology showed 131 (%) endometrioid cancer; 2 patients (1.4%) were finally diagnosed with atypical hyperplasia, 63 (42.6%) with G1, 46 (31%) with G2 and 37 (25%) with G3. Global agreement for histology was fair (K=0.356; SE 0.081; CI 95% 0.08–0.41; p<0.00), while for grading was moderate (K=0.458; SE 0.051; CI 95% 0.36–0.56; p<0.00). In well differenciated tumor agreement was fair (k=0.389; SE 0.074; CI 95% −0.24–0.53; p<0.00), while in G2 and G3 tumors agreement was respectively moderate (k=0.521; SE 0.074; CI 95% −0.38–0.67; p<0.00) and good (k=0.710; SE 0.068; CI 95% −0.57–0.84; p<0.00). Subgroup analysis revealed fair agreement for D&C (k=0.333; SE 0.156; CI 95% 0.03–0.63; p<0.00), as well as for diagnostic hysteroscopy and subsequent D&C (k=0.334; SE 0.098; CI 95% 0.14–0.53; p<0.00) and for office hysteroscopy (k=0.313; SE 0.156; CI 95% 0.00–0.62; p<0.03). Operative hysteroscopy showed moderate agreement (k=0.535; SE 0.084; CI 95% 0.37–0.70; p<0.000).

Conclusion Operative hysteroscopy is the best technique for endometrial biopsy in case of suspected endometrial cancer.

Disclosure Nothing to disclose.