An analysis on the clinicopathological characteristics of 79 cases atypical endometrial hyperplasia

Abstract

To explore the clinicopathological characteristics in atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients. A retrospective study was carried out on 79 cases with atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients admitted to Department of Gynecology, Peking University People's Hospital from Mar. 2007 to Jul. 2010. All patients were divided into two groups, hyperplasia group (merely atypical endometrial hyperplasia, 49 cases, 62%) and cancerization group (atypical endometrial hyperplasia accompanying endometrial carcinoma, 30 cases, 38%). The mean age of 79 cases were (50 ± 11) years old, while they were (50 ± 10) and (51 ± 11) years old for hyperplasia group and cancerization group, there were not difference (P = 0.994). The gravidity and delivery frequencies were also not differently between two groups. The rates of complicated other diseases were 47% (23/49) and 43% (13/30), which was not significantly different (P = 0.755). The body mass index (BMI) of cancerization group was higher than that of hyperplasia group [(27.9 ± 5.4) vs. (25.2 ± 2.9) kg/m², P = 0.024]. There were 50% (15/30) and 31% (15/49) menopause cases in two groups, respectively. Among them there were 13/15 and 8/15 cases showed vaginal bleeding. Among premenopausal patients, there were 12/15 and 68% (23/34) showed abnormal vaginal bleeding, but there were not significantly different between two groups (all P > 0.05). The uterine cavity mass found by ultrasonography in the cancerization group patients was more than that in hyperplasia group [73% (22/30) vs. 51% (25/49), P = 0.050]. There were 23 cases (29%), 44 cases (56%) and 12 cases (15%) were diagnosed by dilatation and curettage (D&G), hysteroscopy and hysterectomy, respectively. The rates of diagnosing atypical endometrial hyperplasia by D&G and hysteroscopy were 87% (21/23) and 93% (41/44), respectively. The rate of diagnosis of canceration were 6/12 and 12/16, respectively. While, the rate of missed diagnosis of canceration in the atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients by D&G and hysteroscopy were 6/13 and 19% (4/21), respectively. Which all did not shown significantly different (P > 0.05). Hysteroscopy or D&G should be chosen on those peri-menopausal patients with abnormal bleeding, while those atypical endometrial hyperplasia patients with high BMI and uterine cavity mass diagnosed with D&G and ultrasonography should consider the possibility of canceration.