Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012 Apr;16(2):80-7. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e318234262d.

Fabric-based exocervical and endocervical biopsy in comparison with punch biopsy and sharp curettage.

Author information

1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Orange Coast Women's Medical Group, Laguna Hills, CA 92653, USA. winter@ocwmg.com

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Fabric-based endocervical and exocervical biopsy tools were compared with exocervical punch biopsy and sharp endocervical curettage. We compared the level of pain reported by the patient and the amount of bleeding rated by the physician relative to the type of biopsy used.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

This was a 2-center institutional review board-approved study of patients undergoing colposcopy. One center randomized patients to undergo either conventional (punch biopsy, sharp endocervical curettage) or fabric-based biopsy of the endocervix and exocervix, and a second center enrolled nonrandomized controls. The patient and physician subjectively rated bleeding (exocervical) and pain (endocervical and exocervical) from the biopsy procedure(s), which were compared using the nonparametric Wilcoxon test.

RESULTS:

Exocervical and endocervical biopsies from 55 patients were compared. Fabric-based biopsies were abundant full-thickness curettage and showed statistically significant less pain and bleeding than the conventional biopsy methods (p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Fabric-based biopsies are significantly less traumatic than conventional biopsies. The benefits of a less-invasive biopsy could increase the willingness to perform multiple biopsies, increase disease detection, and improve patient satisfaction, which could impact future gynecologic health-seeking behavior and compliance with colposcopy recall.

PMID:
22371040
DOI:
10.1097/LGT.0b013e318234262d
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center