Introduction/Background The principal aim is to compare the efficacy of the detection rate of high and low grade endocervical dysplasia between endocervical curettage (EC) vs endocervical brushing (EB). Also complicacion rates, pain and inadequate specimens.
Methodology Randomized clinical trial
Estimation of sample size for sensibility of 84% for EC and 96% for EB in acordance to previous literature, and alpha error of 5% and beta error of 80%: 54 patients. Simple aleatorization was used. After informed consent was signatured we include 100 patients who undergo office conization.
Exlusion criteria were macroscopic tumor, pregnancy or prior conization. We performed either EC o EB prior to conization and compare it result with endocervical margin of the cone specimen.
Results 100 patienst were aletaorized. None of them had exlusion criteria. Demographic caracteristics were comparable between both gropus. Sensibility for EC was 91.27% and specificity 34.26%.
Sensibility for EB was 75% and specificity was 24.65%. Pain, complications or inadequate specimens were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Endocervical curetagge has a higher rate of detection of high grade endocervical dysplasia versus endocervical brushing without more pain or complications. No diferences in inadequate specimens were found.
Disclosure Nothing to disclose
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.