首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Pathology >Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia And Its Correlation With WHO Classified Endometrial Hyperplasia
【24h】

Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia And Its Correlation With WHO Classified Endometrial Hyperplasia

机译:子宫内膜上皮内瘤变及其与WHO分类的子宫内膜增生的关系

获取原文
           

摘要

Introduction: Endometrial hyperplasia produces a continuum of lesions that may be precursor to endometrial carcinoma of endometrioid histology. The World Health Organization (WHO) classification is currently the most commonly accepted system of classifying endometrial hyperplasias, the problems with which have prompted the development of an alternative system based on Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia (EIN).Materials and Methods: We undertook the study using revised EIN criteria to differentiate EIN lesions from lookalikes. EIN diagnostic criteria’s, such as gland area>stromal area, cytologic change in focus of altered architecture, lesion size>1 mm and exclusion of cancer and mimics were applied on two hundred endometrial biopsies that were initially classified as hyperplasia using WHO classification system.Results: Out of total two hundred cases, 41.5% were diagnosed as simple typical hyperplasia, 19% cases as complex typical hyperplasia, 9.5% cases as simple atypical hyperplasia and 30% cases as complex atypical hyperplasia respectively. Out of these WHO classified hyperplasias, 39% were re-classified as EIN and 61% as non-EIN lesions. Majority of WHO classified atypical hyperplasias were reclassified as EIN. Conclusion: EIN criterias can easily be applied to routine haematoxylin and eosin stained sections and is more reproducible than WHO system of classification. Few of the lesions diagnosed as simple hyperplasia without atypia correspond to EIN and have a worse prognosis. EIN successfully segregates patients into high and low cancer risk groups. Introduction Due to inadequately supported reproductive pathologic criteria’s in existing World Health Organization (WHO) classification of endometrial hyperplasia, the diagnosis of precancerous lesions of the endometrium remains unstandardized1. There are many shortcomings in the WHO endometrial hyperplasia classification system that subclassifies hyperplasia by cytology as atypical / non atypical and architecture as complex / non complex.2,3 Overall reproducibility of atypical hyperplasia diagnosis is poor, because of nonspecific reporting patterns and intra/inter-observer variation which leads to confusion among clinicians and pathologists. The Endometrial Collaborative Group, an international group of 19 pathologists has recently attempted to clarify the concept of endometrial neoplasia and proposed two categories of endometrial lesions, endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial neoplasia, the latter divided into intra-epithelial and invasive neoplasia. True endometrial hyperplasia rarely progresses to neoplasia while lesions formerly designated as “atypical hyperplasia” are presently reclassified as Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia (EIN), which carries a significant risk of progression into invasive carcinoma4,5. According to Endometrial Collaborative Group, there are many advantages to diagnose premalignant endometrial disease as EIN such as 1) Pre-cancers should be placed in a single diagnostic category 2) Pre-cancers are monoclonal and thus neoplastic and parallelism with other pre-cancerous nomenclature systems elsewhere in the female genital tract is required 3) Endometria which do not meet diagnostic criteria for EIN can be diagnosed as “Endometrial Hyperplasia” to distinguish them from EIN lesions. Long term prospective multicenter studies have shown that the EIN system is prognostically superior then other commonly used systems9. Based on these considerations, the present study was designed to review Endometrial Intraepithelial Neoplasia (EIN) and to correlate it with WHO classification of endometrial hyperplasia. Materials And Methods Two hundred patients who were not on therapeutic hormones and who presented with abnormal vaginal bleeding were included in this study. The histopathological material consisted of dilatation and curettage, endometrial biopsy and hysterectomy specimen. The material was fixed in 10% formalin and processed in graded alcohol and xyl
机译:简介:子宫内膜增生产生连续的病变,可能是子宫内膜样组织学的子宫内膜癌的先兆。世界卫生组织(WHO)分类是目前最普遍接受的对子宫内膜增生进行分类的系统,该问题促使人们开发了一种基于子宫内膜上皮内瘤变(EIN)的替代系统。材料与方法:修订了EIN标准,以区分EIN病变与外观。 EIN诊断标准包括腺体>基质区域,改变结构的焦点的细胞学变化,病灶大小> 1 mm以及癌变和模拟物的排除,这些均被应用到最初使用WHO分类系统分类为增生的200例子宫内膜活检中。 :在总共200例病例中,分别被诊断为单纯典型增生的41.5%,复杂典型增生的19%,单纯非典型增生的9.5%和复杂非典型增生的30%。在这些经WHO分类的增生中,39%被重新分类为EIN,61%被分类为非EIN病变。 WHO分类的大多数非典型增生被重新分类为EIN。结论:EIN标准可以轻松地应用于常规的苏木和曙红染色切片,并且比WHO分类系统具有更高的可重复性。被诊断为无异型性单纯性增生的病变很少与EIN相对应,预后较差。 EIN成功地将患者分为高风险和低癌症风险人群。简介由于现有的世界卫生组织(WHO)子宫内膜增生分类对生殖病理学标准的支持不充分,子宫内膜癌前病变的诊断仍未标准化。 WHO子宫内膜增生分类系统存在许多缺陷,其通过细胞学将增生分为非典型/非典型和结构为复杂/非复杂。2,3非典型增生诊断的总体可重复性很差,这是因为报告方法不明确以及内部/内部-观察者的差异导致临床医生和病理学家之间的混乱。由19位病理学家组成的国际组织子宫内膜协作组最近试图阐明子宫内膜赘生物的概念,并提出了两类子宫内膜病变:子宫内膜增生和子宫内膜赘生,后者分为上皮内和浸润性赘生。真正的子宫内膜增生很少发展为肿瘤,而以前被称为“非典型增生”的病变目前被重新分类为子宫内膜上皮内瘤变(EIN),这具有发展为浸润性癌的显着风险4,5。根据子宫内膜协作组的说法,诊断诸如EIN的恶性子宫内膜疾病具有许多优势,例如1)前癌应置于单一诊断类别中2)前癌是单克隆的,因此与其他癌前术语具有肿瘤性和平行性在女性生殖道其他地方需要使用系统。3)不符合EIN诊断标准的子宫内膜可诊断为“子宫内膜增生”,以将其与EIN病变区分开。长期的前瞻性多中心研究表明,EIN系统在预后上优于其他常用系统9。基于这些考虑,本研究旨在回顾子宫内膜上皮内瘤样变(EIN),并将其与WHO对子宫内膜增生的分类相关联。材料和方法本研究纳入了200例未使用治疗性激素且出现阴道异常出血的患者。组织病理学材料包括刮除术,子宫内膜活检和子宫切除标本。将该材料固定在10%福尔马林中,并在梯度酒精和二甲苯中加工

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号