The Predictive Value of Endometrial Thickness in Endometrial Pathologies in Premenopausal Women with Abnormal Uterine Bleeding

Roksana Darabi, Mitra Mohit, Hengameh Mohammadkhani, Fathemeh Mohammadyari, Soheila Yadollah-Damavandi


Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is one of the most common complains in women of any age seeking gynecologic health care and needs early diagnosis and proper management due to its impacts on the quality of life. This study was conducted to investigate the cut-off value of endometrial thickness (ET) by trans-vaginal ultra-sonography (TVUS) and evaluate its accuracy in the diagnosis of the endometrial abnormalities in premenopausal women with AUB.

Materials and Methods: In this descriptive  study, 64 married women between 35-50 years old were evaluated due to AUB during 2011-2012; TVUS and fractional curettage were done. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of the ET were calculated in different cut-off values.

Results: The pathological evaluations of the biopsies were normal in 37 (57.8%) patients and were abnormal in 27 (42.2%) patients, 19 endometrial polyps, 6 hyperplastic lesions and 2 endometrial cancers. ET=4 mm had 100% sensitivity, 100% NPV, 10% specificity and 28% PPV in the detection of endometrial abnormalities. ET<10 mm had a proper sensitivity (67%-100%) and NPV (78.6%-100%) but specificity was low (%10-%44). ET=10 mm with sensitivity=63%, specificity=60%, NPV=65.8% and PPV=48.2% was introduced as the cut-off point with the best area under curve (LR+=2.22 LR- =0.77).

Conclusion: Although an ET<10 mm was less likely to be associated with an endometrial abnormality, the low PPV of ET and low area under ROC curve shows sonography has high false positivity in premenopausal women. ET≤4 mm was more reliable and could reduce unnecessary biopsies.

Uterine Bleeding; Pre-menopause; Vaginal ultrasonography; Dilatation; Curettage

Dubinsky TJ. Value of sonography in the diagnosis of abnormal vaginal bleeding. J Clin Ultrasound. 2004;32(7):348-53.

Bettocchi S, Ceci O, Vicino M, Marello F, Impedovo L, Selvaggi L. Diagnostic inadequacy of dilatation and curettage. Fertility and sterility. 2001;75(4):803-5.

Timmermans A, Opmeer BC, Khan KS, Bachmann LM, Epstein E, Clark TJ, et al. Endometrial thickness measurement for detecting endometrial cancer in women with postmenopausal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):160-7.

Bingol B, Gunenc Z, Gedikbasi A, Guner H, Tasdemir S, Tiras B. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;31(1):54-8.

Roy CDP, Singh P, Singh VK, Mahadik K, Jain R. Endometrial Thickness As A Test For Endometrial Cancer In Women With Abnormal Postmenopausal And Perimenopausal Vaginal Bleeding & Its Histopathological Correlation. NJIRM. 2013;4(2):144-8.

Dijkhuizen FPH, AM BRÖLMANN H, Potters AE, Bongers MY, Heintz APM. The accuracy of transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of endometrial abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;87(3):345-9.

Breitkopf DM, Frederickson RA, Snyder RR. Detection of benign endometrial masses by endometrial stripe measurement in premenopausal women. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(1):120-5.

Mortakis AE, Mavrelos K. Transvaginal ultrasonography and hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial abnormalities. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1997;4(4):449-52.

Soares SR, dos Reis MMBB, Camargos AF. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography in patients with uterine cavity diseases. Fertility and sterility. 2000;73(2):406-11.

Özdemir S, Çelik Ç, Gezginç K, Kıreşi D, Esen H. Evaluation of endometrial thickness with transvaginal ultrasonography and histopathology in premenopausal women with abnormal vaginal bleeding. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010;282(4):395-9.

Goldstein RB, Bree RL, Benson CB, Benacerraf BR, Bloss JD, Carlos R, et al. Evaluation of the woman with postmenopausal bleeding: Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound-Sponsored Consensus Conference statement. J Ultrasound Med 2001;20(10):1025-36.

Abe M, Ogawa H, Ayhan A. The use of non‐three‐layer ultrasound in biopsy recommendation for premenopausal women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87(11):1155-61.

Smith P, Bakos O, Heimer G, Ulmsten U. Transvaginal ultrasound for identifying endometrial abnormality. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1991;70(7-8):591-4.

Getpook C, Wattanakumtornkul S. Endometrial thickness screening in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Obstet Gynacol Res 2006;32(6):588-92.

Goldchmit R, Katz Z, Blickstein I, Caspi B, Dgani R. The accuracy of endometrial Pipelle sampling with and without sonographic measurement of endometrial thickness. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82(5):727-30.

Weber AM, Belinson JL, Bradley LD, Piedmonte MR. Vaginal ultrasonography versus endometrial biopsy in women with postmenopausal bleeding. AmjObstet G ynecol. 1997;177(4):924-9.

Dueholm M, Jensen ML, Laursen H, Kracht P. Can the endometrial thickness as measured by trans‐vaginal sonography be used to exclude polyps or hyperplasia in pre‐menopausal patients with abnormal uterine bleeding? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001;80(7):645-51.


  • There are currently no refbacks.