Unus Pro omnibus, omnes Pro uno:绝经后无症状妇女子宫内膜癌筛查的永恒困境评述。是时候联手了吗?

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1080/13645706.2024.2418380
Salvatore Giovanni Vitale, John Preston Parry, Gilda Sicilia, Luis Alonso Pacheco, Maria Chiara De Angelis, Bülent Urman, Gaetano Riemma, Péter Török, Jose Carugno, Tirso Perez-Medina, Stefano Angioni, Sergio Haimovich
{"title":"Unus Pro omnibus, omnes Pro uno:绝经后无症状妇女子宫内膜癌筛查的永恒困境评述。是时候联手了吗?","authors":"Salvatore Giovanni Vitale, John Preston Parry, Gilda Sicilia, Luis Alonso Pacheco, Maria Chiara De Angelis, Bülent Urman, Gaetano Riemma, Péter Török, Jose Carugno, Tirso Perez-Medina, Stefano Angioni, Sergio Haimovich","doi":"10.1080/13645706.2024.2418380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The diagnostic workflow for endometrial carcinoma in postmenopausal asymptomatic women remains an ongoing dilemma. Whereas an ultrasonographic endometrial thickness greater than 4.0 or 5.0 mm is adequate for warranting further investigations in women with postmenopausal vaginal bleeding, there is still no unanimous consensus on what the ideal endometrial thickness cut-off should be, justifying additional inspection through endometrial sampling when bleeding is absent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive overview of the most recent literature to summarize the clinical pathway necessary for the diagnostic assessment of a postmenopausal asymptomatic woman with increased ultrasonographic endometrial thickness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An endometrial thickness cut-off between 3.0 and 5.9 mm seems to show the lowest specificity while also reducing the chances of missing malignancy. If endometrial thickness can be a valid starting point, a careful evaluation of the other ultrasonographic endometrial features and a thorough scrutiny of patients' risk factors are pivotal to standardizing the diagnostic process while avoiding overtreatment. Although preventing unnecessary procedures is crucial, stratifying the risk and proceeding with further investigations (preferably through outpatient or office hysteroscopically-guided targeted biopsies) should be the goal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Closer collaboration between different fields of medicine (ultrasonography, hysteroscopy, and oncology) is strongly encouraged to facilitate early diagnosis of asymptomatic postmenopausal women at risk of developing endometrial malignancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":18537,"journal":{"name":"Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies","volume":" ","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<i>Unus Pro omnibus, omnes Pro uno</i>: a commentary on the eternal dilemma of endometrial cancer screening in postmenopausal asymptomatic women. Is it time to team up?\",\"authors\":\"Salvatore Giovanni Vitale, John Preston Parry, Gilda Sicilia, Luis Alonso Pacheco, Maria Chiara De Angelis, Bülent Urman, Gaetano Riemma, Péter Török, Jose Carugno, Tirso Perez-Medina, Stefano Angioni, Sergio Haimovich\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13645706.2024.2418380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The diagnostic workflow for endometrial carcinoma in postmenopausal asymptomatic women remains an ongoing dilemma. Whereas an ultrasonographic endometrial thickness greater than 4.0 or 5.0 mm is adequate for warranting further investigations in women with postmenopausal vaginal bleeding, there is still no unanimous consensus on what the ideal endometrial thickness cut-off should be, justifying additional inspection through endometrial sampling when bleeding is absent.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive overview of the most recent literature to summarize the clinical pathway necessary for the diagnostic assessment of a postmenopausal asymptomatic woman with increased ultrasonographic endometrial thickness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An endometrial thickness cut-off between 3.0 and 5.9 mm seems to show the lowest specificity while also reducing the chances of missing malignancy. If endometrial thickness can be a valid starting point, a careful evaluation of the other ultrasonographic endometrial features and a thorough scrutiny of patients' risk factors are pivotal to standardizing the diagnostic process while avoiding overtreatment. Although preventing unnecessary procedures is crucial, stratifying the risk and proceeding with further investigations (preferably through outpatient or office hysteroscopically-guided targeted biopsies) should be the goal.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Closer collaboration between different fields of medicine (ultrasonography, hysteroscopy, and oncology) is strongly encouraged to facilitate early diagnosis of asymptomatic postmenopausal women at risk of developing endometrial malignancy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18537,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2024.2418380\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13645706.2024.2418380","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:绝经后无症状妇女子宫内膜癌的诊断流程仍是一个难题。虽然对于绝经后阴道出血的妇女来说,超声检查子宫内膜厚度大于 4.0 或 5.0 毫米足以证明有必要进行进一步检查,但对于理想的子宫内膜厚度临界值是多少仍未达成一致共识,因此在没有出血的情况下,有必要通过子宫内膜取样进行额外检查:方法:全面综述最新文献,总结诊断评估绝经后无症状妇女超声检查子宫内膜厚度增加所需的临床路径:结果:子宫内膜厚度在 3.0 至 5.9 毫米之间的临界值似乎显示出最低的特异性,同时也降低了漏诊恶性肿瘤的几率。如果子宫内膜厚度可以作为一个有效的起点,那么仔细评估子宫内膜的其他超声特征和全面检查患者的风险因素对于规范诊断过程和避免过度治疗至关重要。尽管防止不必要的手术至关重要,但对风险进行分层并开展进一步检查(最好是通过门诊或诊室宫腔镜引导下的靶向活检)应是我们的目标:结论:强烈建议不同医学领域(超声波检查、宫腔镜检查和肿瘤学)之间开展更紧密的合作,以促进对绝经后无症状且有子宫内膜恶性肿瘤风险的妇女进行早期诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Unus Pro omnibus, omnes Pro uno: a commentary on the eternal dilemma of endometrial cancer screening in postmenopausal asymptomatic women. Is it time to team up?

Introduction: The diagnostic workflow for endometrial carcinoma in postmenopausal asymptomatic women remains an ongoing dilemma. Whereas an ultrasonographic endometrial thickness greater than 4.0 or 5.0 mm is adequate for warranting further investigations in women with postmenopausal vaginal bleeding, there is still no unanimous consensus on what the ideal endometrial thickness cut-off should be, justifying additional inspection through endometrial sampling when bleeding is absent.

Methods: A comprehensive overview of the most recent literature to summarize the clinical pathway necessary for the diagnostic assessment of a postmenopausal asymptomatic woman with increased ultrasonographic endometrial thickness.

Results: An endometrial thickness cut-off between 3.0 and 5.9 mm seems to show the lowest specificity while also reducing the chances of missing malignancy. If endometrial thickness can be a valid starting point, a careful evaluation of the other ultrasonographic endometrial features and a thorough scrutiny of patients' risk factors are pivotal to standardizing the diagnostic process while avoiding overtreatment. Although preventing unnecessary procedures is crucial, stratifying the risk and proceeding with further investigations (preferably through outpatient or office hysteroscopically-guided targeted biopsies) should be the goal.

Conclusions: Closer collaboration between different fields of medicine (ultrasonography, hysteroscopy, and oncology) is strongly encouraged to facilitate early diagnosis of asymptomatic postmenopausal women at risk of developing endometrial malignancy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
39
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Minimally Invasive Therapy and Allied Technologies (MITAT) is an international forum for endoscopic surgeons, interventional radiologists and industrial instrument manufacturers. It is the official journal of the Society for Medical Innovation and Technology (SMIT) whose membership includes representatives from a broad spectrum of medical specialities, instrument manufacturing and research. The journal brings the latest developments and innovations in minimally invasive therapy to its readers. What makes Minimally Invasive Therapy and Allied Technologies unique is that we publish one or two special issues each year, which are devoted to a specific theme. Key topics covered by the journal include: interventional radiology, endoscopic surgery, imaging technology, manipulators and robotics for surgery and education and training for MIS.
期刊最新文献
Endoscopic cardiac mucosal ligation: a novel minimally invasive procedure for gastroesophageal reflux disease. The effect of peritoneal flap fixation with curling technique on postoperative lymphocele formation in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Right mini-thoracotomy for concomitant aortic valve replacement and right coronary artery bypass graft. Three-dimensional semiquantitative evaluation of reactive emphysema in magnesium implant models. Clash of the Titans: the first multi-center retrospective comparative study between da Vinci and Hugo RAS surgical systems for the treatment of deep endometriosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1