Factors Influencing on Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Why a Personalized Approach Should Be Applied?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interests
References
- Khafaga, A.; Goldstein, S.R. Abnormal Uterine Bleeding. Obstet. Gynecol. Clin. N. Am. 2019, 46, 595–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Clarke, M.A.; Long, B.J.; Sherman, M.E.; Lemens, M.A.; Podratz, K.C.; Hopkins, M.R.; Ahlberg, L.J.; Mc Guire, L.J.; Laughlin-Tommaso, S.K.; Bakkum-Gamez, J.N.; et al. Risk assessment of endometrial cancer and endometrial intraepithelial neoplasia in women with abnormal bleeding and implications for clinical management algorithms. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020, 223, e1–e549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Terzic, M.M.; Aimagambetova, G.; Terzic, S.; Norton, M.; Bapayeva, G.; Garzon, S. Current role of Pipelle endometrial sampling in early diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Transl. Cancer Res. 2020, 9, 7716–7724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abbas, T.; Husain, A. Emergency department management of abnormal uterine bleeding in the nonpregnant patient. Emerg. Med. Pract. 2021, 23, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
- Braun, M.M.; Overbeek-Wager, E.A.; Grumbo, R.J. Diagnosis and Management of Endometrial Cancer. Am. Fam. Physician 2016, 93, 468–474. [Google Scholar]
- Koh, W.J.; Abu-Rustum, N.R.; Bean, S.; Bradley, K.; Campos, S.M.; Cho, K.R.; Chon, H.S.; Chu, C.; Cohn, D.; Crispens, M.A.; et al. Uterine Neoplasms, Version 1.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 2018, 16, 170–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nicholls-Dempsey, L.; Kamga-Ngande, C.; Bélisle, S.; Lapensée, L.; Roy, G.; Tremblay, C.; Simard-Émond, L. Endometrial Biopsy in an Outpatient Gynaecological Setting: Overinvestigation. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can. 2018, 40, 1309–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wouk, N.; Helton, M. Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Premenopausal Women. Am. Fam. Physician 2019, 99, 435–443. [Google Scholar]
- Terzic, M.; Aimagambetova, G.; Kunz, J.; Bapayeva, G.; Aitbayeva, B.; Terzic, S.; Laganà, A.S. Molecular Basis of Endometriosis and Endometrial Cancer: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 9274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaunitz, A.M. Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Reproductive-Age Women. JAMA 2019, 321, 2126–2127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visser, N.C.; Breijer, M.C.; Herman, M.C.; Bekkers, R.L.; Veersema, S.; Opmeer, B.C.; Mol, B.W.; Timmermans, A.; Pijnenborg, J.M. Factors attributing to the failure of endometrial sampling in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2013, 92, 1216–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adambekov, S.; Goughnour, S.L.; Mansuria, S.; Donnellan, N.; Elishaev, E.; Villanueva, H.J.; Edwards, R.P.; Bovbjerg, D.H.; Linkov, F. Patient and provider factors associated with endometrial Pipelle sampling failure. Gynecol. Oncol. 2017, 144, 324–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aimagambetova, G.; Terzic, S.; Laganà, A.S.; Bapayeva, G.; La Fleur, P.; Terzic, M. Contemporary Fertility-Sparing Management Options of Early Stage Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer in Young Nulliparous Patients. J. Clin. Med. 2021, 11, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bagaria, M.; Wentzensen, N.; Clarke, M.; Hopkins, M.R.; Ahlberg, L.J.; Mc Guire, L.J.; Lemens, M.A.; Weaver, A.L.; VanOosten, A.; Shields, E.; et al. Quantifying procedural pain associated with office gynecologic tract sampling methods. Gynecol. Oncol. 2021, 162, 128–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Terzic, M.; Aimagambetova, G.; Bapayeva, G.; Ukybassova, T.; Kenbayeva, K.; Kaiyrlykyzy, A.; Ibrayimov, B.; Lyasova, A.; Terzic, S.; Alkatout, I.; et al. Pipelle endometrial sampling success rates in Kazakhstani settings: Results from a prospective cohort analysis. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2021, 30, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Piatek, S.; Warzecha, D.; Kisielewski, F.; Szymusik, I.; Panek, G.; Wielgos, M. Pipelle biopsy and dilatation and curettage in clinical practice: Are factors affecting their effectiveness the same? J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2019, 45, 645–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elsandabesee, D.; Greenwood, P. The performance of Pipelle endometrial sampling in a dedicated postmenopausal bleeding clinic. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2005, 25, 32–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soykan Sert, Z. Effect of video information on anxiety level in women undergoing endometrial biopsy. J. Contemp. Med. 2020, 10, 505–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rolim, M.O.; Morais, A.L.R.; Nogueira, C.S.; Araujo, M.D.S.M.; Moraes, D.V.; Coelho, R.A. Pain and anxiety in office histeroscopy. Rev. Assoc. Med. Bras. 2020, 66, 1633–1637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kozman, E.; Collins, P.; Howard, A.; Akanmu, T.; Gibbs, A.; Frazer, M. The effect of an intrauterine application of two percent lignocaine gel on pain perception during Vabra endometrial sampling: A randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2001, 108, 87–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haefeli, M.; Elfering, A. Pain assessment. Eur. Spine J. 2006, 15 (Suppl. S1), S17–S24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- StataCorp LLC. Stata Statistical Software: Release 16. 2019. Available online: https://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/citing-software-documentation-faqs/#:~:text=2019.,Station%2C%20TX%3A%20StataCorp%20LLC.&text=StataCorp.,-2017 (accessed on 20 August 2021).
- Cheong, Y.; Cameron, I.T.; Critchley, H.O.D. Abnormal uterine bleeding. Br. Med. Bull. 2017, 123, 103–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Charoenkwan, K.; Nantasupha, C. Methods of pain control during endometrial biopsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2020, 46, 9–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanam, M.; Majid, M.M. Comparison the Diagnostic Value of Dilatation and Curettage Versus Endometrial Biopsy by Pipelle—a Clinical Trial. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2015, 16, 4971–4975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Xie, B.; Qian, C.; Yang, B.; Ning, C.; Yao, X.; Du, Y.; Shi, Y.; Luo, X.; Chen, X. Risk factors for unsuccessful office-based endometrial biopsy: A comparative study of office-based endometrial biopsy (Pipelle) and diagnostic dilation and curettage. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2018, 25, 724–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abbas, A.M.; Samy, A.; El-Naser Abd El-Gaber Ali, A.; Khodry, M.M.; Ahmed, M.A.M.; El-Rasheedy, M.I.; Abdallah, K.M.; Mohammed, A.E.; Abdelbaky, W.H.; Raslan, O.K.; et al. Medications for pain relief in outpatient endometrial sampling or biopsy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril. 2019, 112, 140–148.e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiyrlykyzy, A.; Linkov, F.; Foster, F.; Bapayeva, G.; Ukybassova, T.; Aimagambetova, G.; Kenbayeva, K.; Ibrayimov, B.; Lyasova, A.; Terzic, M. Pipelle endometrial biopsy for abnormal uterine bleeding: Do patient’s pain and anxiety really impact on sampling success rate? BMC Women’s Health 2021, 21, 393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adambekov, S.; Lopa, S.; Edwards, R.P.; Bovbjerg, D.H.; Linkov, F.; Donnellan, N. Anxiety and Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy: A Prospective Study [11F]. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020, 135, 63S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanko, N.M.; Linkov, F.; Bapayeva, G.; Ukybassova, T.; Kaiyrlykyzy, A.; Aimagambetova, G.; Kenbayeva, K.; Ibrayimov, B.; Lyasova, A.; Terzic, M. Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding in Daily Clinical Practice: Why the Approach to Patients Should Be Personalized? J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11, 970. [Google Scholar]
N(%) | Pain Score before Biopsy | p-Value | Pain Score during Biopsy | p-Value | Pain Score after Biopsy | p-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age group | 0.2866 | 0.7676 | 0.16 | ||||
≤44 | 94 (58.75%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
45–54 | 47 (29.4%) | 1 (0–2.5) | 3 (1–5) | 1 (1–3) | |||
≥55 | 19 (11.9%) | 0 (0–2.5) | 3 (1.5–5.5) | 2 (0.5–4.5) | |||
Menopausal status | 0.4755 | 0.8933 | 0.6017 | ||||
Premenopausal | 131 (81.9%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
Postmenopausal | 29 (18.1%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–3) | |||
Body mass index | 0.216 | 0.8147 | 0.9082 | ||||
Normal | 70 (43.7%) | 0 (0–1.75) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–3) | |||
Overweight and obese | 90 (56.3%) | 1 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
Type of provider | 0.0087 | <0.0001 | 0.15 | ||||
Senior OBGYN | 100 (62.5%) | 1 (0–3) | 2 (0–5) | 2 (1–3) | |||
Junior OBGYN | 60 (37.5%) | 0 (0–1) | 5 (3–6.25) | 2.5 (1–4) | |||
Indication for biopsy | 0.7038 | 0.6526 | 0.4174 | ||||
Abnormal bleeding in reproductive age | 97 (60.6%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
Premenopausal bleeding | 29 (18.1%) | 1 (0–2) | 3 (1.5–5.5) | 1 (1–3) | |||
Postmenopausal bleeding | 34 (21.3%) | 0 (0–0.25) | 3 (0.75–5) | 1.5 (0.75–3.25) | |||
Parity | 0.6513 | 0.3791 | 0.1083 | ||||
None | 48 (30%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (0–5.25) | 2 (1–4.25) | |||
One and more | 112 (70%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–3) | |||
Education | 0.6854 | 0.6854 | 0.6309 | ||||
None, technical and college | 65 (40.6%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–3) | |||
High, postgraduate | 87 (54.4%) | 0 (0–2) | 3 (0.5–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
NA (missing values) | 8 (5%) | ||||||
Income | 0.6715 | 0.5148 | 0.2308 | ||||
Not satisfactory | 29 (18.1%) | 1 (0–2) | 3 (0–5) | 1 (1–3) | |||
Satisfactory | 91 (56.9%) | 0 (1–0.25) | 3 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
NA (missing values) | 40 (25%) | ||||||
Residency | 0.7065 | 0.3226 | 0.08217 | ||||
Urban | 128 (80%) | 0 (0–2) | 3.5 (1–5) | 2 (1–4) | |||
Rural | 30 (18.8%) | 1 (0–1.75) | 3 (0.25–4.5) | 1 (1–2) | |||
NA (missing values) | 2 (1.2%) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Terzic, M.; Aimagambetova, G.; Ukybassova, T.; Bapayeva, G.; Kaiyrlykyzy, A.; Foster, F.; Linkov, F. Factors Influencing on Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Why a Personalized Approach Should Be Applied? J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12, 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030431
Terzic M, Aimagambetova G, Ukybassova T, Bapayeva G, Kaiyrlykyzy A, Foster F, Linkov F. Factors Influencing on Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Why a Personalized Approach Should Be Applied? Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2022; 12(3):431. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030431
Chicago/Turabian StyleTerzic, Milan, Gulzhanat Aimagambetova, Talshyn Ukybassova, Gauri Bapayeva, Aiym Kaiyrlykyzy, Faye Foster, and Faina Linkov. 2022. "Factors Influencing on Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Why a Personalized Approach Should Be Applied?" Journal of Personalized Medicine 12, no. 3: 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030431
APA StyleTerzic, M., Aimagambetova, G., Ukybassova, T., Bapayeva, G., Kaiyrlykyzy, A., Foster, F., & Linkov, F. (2022). Factors Influencing on Pain in Patients Undergoing Pipelle Endometrial Biopsy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Why a Personalized Approach Should Be Applied? Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(3), 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12030431