Author/Authors :
Mohammadi Mahdi نويسنده PhD student, Payam Noor University, Iran , Niazi Abbasali نويسنده Department of Pathology, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran Niazi Abbasali , Farzaneh Farahnaz نويسنده Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Infectious
Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Zahedan University
of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran , Eamaeilzadeh Arezoo نويسنده Gynacologis, Depatment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran , Rezaei Soodabeh نويسنده General Gynecologist, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, IR Iran
Abstract :
[Background]To compare efficacy of pipelle biopsy as an office biopsy method with dilatation curettage (D&C) for women referring Ali Ebn e Abitaleb hospital of Zahedan university of medical science in 2015 - 2016.[Methods]In this cross sectional study, 200 patients with Abnormal Uterine Bleeding (AUB) who had referred to gynecology clinic of Ali Ebn e Abitaleb Hospital of Zahedan University of medical science, were selected. The patients were randomly allocated to the two groups based on permuted block design method. In 1th group (n = 100), pipelle biopsy was performed as office biopsy and 2th group (n = 100), dilatation curettage (D&C) was performed in operation room. Sampling was done by the same surgeon and was interpreted by the same pathologist.[Results]The samples were adequate in 1th group (n = 88), 88% and in 2th group (n = 98) 98%. Fisher test was used for statistical analysis. It reported statistical significant difference between pipelle biopsy and dilatation curettage (D&C) in terms of histopathology and samples efficacy (P = 0.01).[Conclusions]Obtained results demonstrated that efficacy of pipelle biopsy is high.Totally this procedure is safe and cost-effective with low complications. However, we should be careful to alternate pipelle biopsy instead ofdilatation-curettage (D&C) in AUB approach.
