Estimation of relative risk of development and informativeness of diagnostic methods of hyperproliferative processes of endometrium

Abstract

The aim: To conduct a comparative analysis of the results of ultrasound and hysteroscopic examinations with further histopathological findings and the clinical and anamnestic features of patients with hyperproliferative pathology in order to determine the etiopathogenetic mechanisms of the development of endometrial pathological processes. Materials and methods: We studied 119 medical records of patients of the Gynecological Department of Minipal Non-Commercial Enterprise “Ternopil Municipal City Hospital No. 2”, who applied for medical assistance because of benign endometrial hyperplasia in the reproductive age with a verified diagnosis of “uterine polyp” during 2017–2018. The control group consisted of 30 patients of the same age group, with menstrual disorders with no signs of hyperplastic processes of endometrium. With the consent of the patients, they were treated with diagnostic hysteroscopy in order to study evacuated material from the uterus. The results of the histological study confirmed the absence of signs of hyperplastic processes of endometrium. The results of diagnostic methods were evaluated by comparing the material’s histological data with the results of ultrasound and hysteroresectoscopy. Results: Taking into account the results of our research, women with hyperplastic processes of endometrium have the risk of the pathology of the nervous system is in 2.71 times higher (OR=2.71, CI–0.88: 8.33), cardiovascular pathology—in 2.04 (OR=2.04, CI–0.57:7.34), vascular diseases of the lower extremities—in 1.81 times (OR=1.81, CI–0.21:15.32) compared with the control group. While the risk of pathology of the urinary system and organs of vision is only—OR=0.48, CI–0.11:2.03 and OR=0.75, CI–0.08:7.48, respectively. Analyzing the results of the study using ultrasound examination, it was found that endometrial polyposis in combination with uterine leiomyoma was not detected in 3 women (15%), while all the results of hysteroscopy were confirmed by histopathological studies. When the endometrial hyperplastic processes were combined with adenomyosis— according to ultrasound examination a false positive result was obtained in 2 patients (13.3%), and in a hysteroscopic study we determined –1 false positive result. In patients the diagnosis of “endometrial polyp” according to the results of hysteroscopy was not confirmed in 2 women (2 false positive results 2.99%) and in 5 cases of ultrasound examination (5 false negative results 7.46%). The use of ultrasound examinations in patients with endometrial hyperplastic changes, according to our data, made it possible to identify pathology in 88.39% of cases, while the information content of the hysteroscopy was 98.21% (p<0.001). Conclusions: Thus, the results of the subjective examination of patients in the gynecological department: complaints, anamnestic data on gynecological and extragenital pathology should be used to identify etiopathogenetic factors and the formation of risk groups for the occurrence of hyperplastic processes of endometrium. Women with cervical erosion, uterine myoma and episodes of herpetic rash on the mucous membranes in past medical history have a higher likelihood of hyperplastic processes of endometrium. The vast majority of patients (63.87%) with polyps of the body of the uterus have a combined hyperproliferative pathology, which requires an individual approach to planning the scope of diagnostic examination and the choice of treatment method. Visualization of endometrium with hysteroscopy is more informative than ultrasound for diagnosing hyperproliferative processes, including uterine polyps. Hysteroscopic polypectomy has a high level of both clinical and economic benefits as well as diagnostic value in patients with hyperplastic processes of endometrium.