Advertisement

Sonohysterography and endometrial cancer: incidence and functional viability of disseminated malignant cells

      Objective

      The purpose of this study was to evaluate sonohysterography in patients with endometrial cancer and to determine whether (1) transtubal fluid spill occurs during routine sonohysterography, (2) a critical infusion volume for spill exists, or (3) disseminated cancer cells demonstrate viability.

      Study Design

      At laparotomy, sonohysterography was performed on 16 patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma. Volumes at which tubal spill occurred were recorded. Collected specimens were processed and incubated. After evaluation for viable cells, cytologic analysis was undertaken.

      Results

      The median volume that was required for adequate sonohysterography was 8.5 mL. Five patients (31%) had transtubal spill. With an additional saline solution flush, the median total volume for a spill was 20.5 mL. Two patients (12.5%) had viable benign cells that were cultured after routine sonohysterography. One patient (6%) had nonviable carcinoma cells that were identified.

      Conclusion

      Transtubal spill occurs during sonohysterography. No critical spill volume was identified. A highly diagnostic tool when abnormal bleeding is evaluated, sonohysterography has a low probability of cancer cell dissemination.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Jemal A.
        • Siegel R.
        • Ward E.
        • et al.
        Cancer statistics 2006.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2006; 56: 106-130
        • Richman T.S.
        • Viscomi G.N.
        • deCherney A.
        • Polan M.L.
        • Alcebo L.O.
        Fallopian tubal patency assessed by ultrasound following fluid injection: work in progress.
        Radiology. 1984; 152: 507-510
        • Lindheim S.R.
        • Sauer M.V.
        Upper genital tract screening with hysterosonography in patients receiving donated oocytes.
        Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1998; 60: 47-50
        • Keltz M.D.
        • Olive D.L.
        • Kim A.H.
        • Arici A.
        Sonohysterography for screening in recurrent pregnancy loss.
        Fertil Steril. 1997; 67: 670-674
        • Romano F.
        • Cicinelli E.
        • Anastasio P.
        • Epifani S.
        • Fanelli F.
        • Galantino P.
        Sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy for diagnosing endouterine abnormalities in fertile women.
        Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1994; 45: 253-260
        • Cicinelli E.
        • Romano F.
        • Anastasio P.
        • Blasi N.
        • Parisi C.
        • Galantino P.
        Transabdominal sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysterography in the evaluation of submucous myomas.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 85: 42-47
        • Randolph J.R.
        • Ying Y.K.
        • Maier D.B.
        • Schmidt C.L.
        • Riddick D.H.
        Comparison of realtime ultrasonography, hysterosalpingography, and laparoscopy/hysteroscopy in the evaluation of uterine abnormalities and tubal patency.
        Fertil Steril. 1986; 49: 828-832
        • Saidi M.H.
        • Sadler R.K.
        • Theis V.D.
        • Akright B.D.
        • Farhart S.A.
        • Villaneuva G.R.
        Comparison of sonography, sonohysterography, and hysteroscopy for evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding.
        J Ultrasound Med. 1997; 16: 587-591
        • Widrich T.
        • Bradley L.D.
        • Mitchinson A.R.
        • Collins R.L.
        Comparison of saline infusion sonography with office hysteroscopy for the evaluation of the endometrium.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 174: 1327-1334
        • Romano S.
        • Shimoni Y.
        • Muralee D.
        • Shalev E.
        Retrograde seeding of endometrial cancer during hysteroscopy.
        Gynecol Oncol. 1992; 44: 116-118
        • Egarter C.
        • Krestan C.
        • Kurz C.
        Abdominal dissemination of malignant cells with hysteroscopy.
        Gynecol Oncol. 1996; 63: 143-144
        • Sagawa T.
        • Yamada H.
        • Sakuragi N.
        • Fujimoto S.
        A comparison between the preoperative and operative findings of peritoneal cytology in patients with endometrial cancer.
        Asia Oceania J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994; 20: 39-47
        • Obermair A.
        • Geramou M.
        • Gucer F.
        • et al.
        Does hysteroscopy facilitate tumor cell dissemination?.
        Cancer. 2000; 88: 139-143
        • Zerbe M.J.
        • Zhang J.
        • Bristow R.E.
        • Grumbine C.
        • Abularach S.
        • Montz F.J.
        Retrograde seeding of malignant cells during hysteroscopy in presumed early endometrial cancer.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 79: 55-58
        • Lo K.W.
        • Cheung T.H.
        • Yim S.F.
        • Chung T.K.
        Hysteroscopic dissemination of endometrial carcinoma using carbon dioxide and normal saline: a retrospective study.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2002; 84: 394-398
        • Bradley W.H.
        • Boente M.P.
        • Brooker D.
        • et al.
        Hysteroscopy and cytology in endometrial cancer.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104: 1030-1033
        • Alcazar J.L.
        • Errasti T.
        • Zornoza A.
        Saline infusion sonohysterography in endometrial cancer: assessment of malignant cells dissemination risk.
        Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2000; 79: 321-322
        • Dessole S.
        • Rubattu G.
        • Farina M.
        • et al.
        Risks and usefulness of sonohysterography in patients with endometrial carcinoma.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 194: 362-368
        • Simon R.
        Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.
        Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10: 1-10
        • Arikan G.
        • Reich O.
        • Weiss U.
        • et al.
        Are endometrial carcinoma cells disseminated at hysteroscopy functionally viable?.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2001; 83: 221-226
        • Obermair A.
        • Geramou M.
        • Gucer F.
        • et al.
        Impact of hysteroscopy on disease-free survival in clinically stage I endometrial cancer patients.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2000; 10: 275-279
        • Sainz de la Cuesta R.
        • Espinosa J.A.
        • Crespo E.
        • Granizo J.J.
        • Rivas F.
        Does fluid hysteroscopy increase the stage or worsen the prognosis in patients with endometrial cancer?.
        Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004; 115: 211-215
        • Creasman W.T.
        • Disaia P.J.
        • Blessing J.
        • Wilkinson R.H.
        • Johnston W.
        • Weed J.C.
        Prognostic significance of peritoneal cytology in patients with endometrial cancer and preliminary data concerning therapy with intraperitoneal radiopharmaceuticals.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981; 141: 921-929
        • Morrow C.P.
        • Bundy B.N.
        • Kurman R.J.
        • et al.
        Relationship between surgical-pathological risk factors and outcome in clinical stage I and II carcinoma of the endometrium: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study.
        Gynecol Oncol. 1991; 40: 55-65
        • Milosevic M.F.
        • Dembo A.J.
        • Thomas G.M.
        The clinical significance of malignant peritoneal cytology in stage I endometrial carcinoma.
        Int J Gynecol Cancer. 1992; 2: 225-235
        • Havrilesky L.J.
        • Cragun J.M.
        • Calingaert B.
        • et al.
        The prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology and adnexal/serosal metastasis in stage IIIA endometrial cancer.
        Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 104: 401-405
        • Yazigi R.
        • Piver M.S.
        • Blumenson L.
        Malignant peritoneal cytology as prognostic indicator in stage I endometrial cancer.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1983; 62: 359-362
        • Lurain J.R.
        • Rumsey N.
        • Schink J.C.
        • Wallemark C.B.
        • Chmiel J.
        Prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in clinical stage I adenocarcinoma of the endometrium.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 74: 175-179
        • Kadar N.
        • Homesley H.D.
        • Malfetano J.H.
        Positive peritoneal cytology is an adverse factor in endometrial carcinoma only if there is other evidence of extrauterine disease.
        Gynecol Oncol. 1992; 46: 145-149
        • Kasamatsu T.
        • Onda T.
        • Katsumata N.
        • et al.
        Prognostic significance of positive peritoneal cytology in endometrial carcinoma confined to the uterus.
        Br J Cancer. 2003; 88: 245-250
        • Tebeu P.M.
        • Popowski Y.
        • Verkooijen H.M.
        • et al.
        Positive peritoneal cytology in early-stage endometrial cancer does not influence prognosis.
        Br J Cancer. 2004; 91: 720-724