González-Becerra JE, Moreno-García JD, Leroy-López L, Gallardo LE

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 414-421
PDF size: 376.50 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Hysteroscopic studies are of the most used methods to examine the uterine cavity in patients that present abnormal uterine hemorrhage as well as those patients with infertility. The use of hystero-scopic studies during reproductive cycles has increased the successful of pregnancy rates. Up to date, there are not many studies evaluating the inter-observer agreement in the diagnosis of different uterine pathology when using a hysteroscopic study.
Objective: To evaluate the inter-observer agreement in the diagnosis of uterine pathology when using digitalized images in hysteroscopic studies made by residents of gynecological endoscopy.
Materials and methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive and observational study was made including 28 images of hysteroscopic studies selected by at least two of three experts in hysteroscopy, who determined that they were adequate to do a diagnostic impresion. From a total of four residents, two were selected using a randomized sampling. The images were shown to each resident in a randomized presentation and the diagnosis agreement was evaluated. Kappa test was used to evaluate the interobserver agreement with 95% confidence interval.
Results: The interobserver agreement obtained by Kappa test for different images for diagnosis of uterine pathology were: normal uterine cavity (κ = 0.81 with CI 95%, 0.56-1.00), endometrial polypus (κ = 0.71 with CI 95%, 0.33-1.00), submucous myoma (κ = 0.71 with CI 95%, 0.33- 1.00), intrauterine adherences (k = 0.84 with CI 95%, 0.52-1.00), uterine septum (κ = 0.76 with CI 95%, 0.43-1.00) and endometrial hyperplasia or potential endometrial cancer (κ = 0.87 with CI 95%, 0.61-1.00).
Conclusions: The interobserver agreement using digitalized images in the diagnosis of different uterine pathology from hysteroscopic studies made by residents of endoscopic surgery was high and very high in all cases.

REFERENCES

1. Campo R, Molinas R, Rombauts L et al. Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate factors influencing the success rate of office diagnostic hysteroscopy. Hum Reprod 2005; 20:258-263.

2. Demirol A, Gurgan T. Effect of treatment of intrauterine pathologies with office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent IVF failure. Reprod Biomed Online 2004;8:590-4.

3. Doldi N, Persico P, di Sebastiano F, Marsiglio E, de Santis L, Rabellotti E, et al. Pathologic findings in hysteroscopy before in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Gynecol Endocrinol 2005;21:235-7.

4. Fabres C, Alam V, Balmaceda J, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mackenna A, Fernandez E. Comparison of ultrasonography and hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of intrauterine lesions in infertile women. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1998;5:375- 8.

5. Hinckley MD, Milki AA. 1000 Office-Based Hysteroscopies prior to in vitro fertilization: Feasibility and Findings. JSLS. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons 2004;8:103-107.

6. Rama Raju GA, ShashiKumari G, Krishna KM, Prakash GJ, Madan K. Assessment of uterine cavity by hysteroscopy in assisted reproduction programme and its influence on pregnancy outcome. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2006;274:160- 164.

7. Widrich T, Bradley LD, Mitchinson AR, Collins RL. Comparison of saline infusión sonography with office hysteroscopy for the evaluation of the endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:1327-34.

8. Agostini A, Collette E, Provansal M, Estrade JP, Blanc B, Gamerre M. Bonne pratique et valeur diagnostique de l’hystéroscopie diagnostique et des prélèvements histologiques. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 2008;37:S343- 8.

9. Valle RF. Hysteroscopy in the evaluation of female infertility. Am J ObstetGynecol 1980;137:425-31.

10. Grimbizis GF, Camus M, Tarlatzis BC, et al. Clinical implications of uterine malformations and hysteroscopic treatment results. Hum Reprod Update 2001;7:161-174.

11. Sotirios H, Saravelos, Cocksedge KA, et al. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure; a critical appraisal. Hum Reprod Update 2008;14: 415-429.

12. Verkauf BS. Myomectomy for fertility enhancement and preservation. Fertil Steril 1992;58:1-15.

13. Peterson WF, Novak ER. Endometrial polyps. Obstet Gynecol 1956;8:40-9.

14. DeWaay DJ, Syrop CH, Nygaard IE, D avis WA, Van Voorhis BJ. Natural history of uterine polyps and leiomyomata. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:3-7.

15. Loverro G, Bettocchi S, Cormio G, Nicolardi V, Porreca MR, Pansini N, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of hysteroscopy in endometrial hyperplasia. Maturitas 1996;25:187-91.

16. Kurman RJ, Kaminski PF, Norris HJ. The behavior of endometrial hyperplasia. A long-termstudy of ‘‘untreated’’ hyperplasia in 170 patients. Cancer 1985;56:403-12.

17. Rivero B, Gorostidi M, Cortaberria JR, Arrue M, Goyeneche L. Hallazgos histeroscópicos en mujeres asintomáticas con ecografría sugestiva de patología endometrial. Prog Obstet Ginecol 2010;53:495-501.

18. Cerda LJ, Virrarroel DP. Evaluación de la concordancia inter-observador en investigación pediátrica: Coeficiente de Kappa. Rev Chil Pediatr 2008;79:54-58.

19. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and psychological measurement. 1960;20: 37-46.

20. Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33:159-74.

21. Kasius JC, Broekmans FJ, Veersema S, Eijkemans MJ, Santbrink EJ, Devroey R, et al. Observer agreement in the evaluation of the uterine cavity by hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 2011;26:801-807.

22. Janine G, Smit, Kasius JC, Marinus JC, Eijkemans MJ, Veersema S, et al. The international agreement study on the diagnosis of the septate uterus at office hysteroscopy in infertile patients. Fertil and Steril 2013;99:2108-13.

23. Rivero B, Gorostidi M, Cortaberria JR, Oyarzabal A, Arrue A. Evaluación morfológica endometrial histeroscópica. Prog Obstet Ginecol 2013;56:79-85.

24. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa. I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:543-9.