Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of studies reporting the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of various diagnostic procedures in endometrial carcinoma

From: Comparison of pretreatment assessment of intrauterine tumor spread in endometrial carcinoma using ultrasonography, hysteroscopy, and fractional curettage

Author(s), year, reference

Patients (n)

Diagnostic procedure (%)

Accuracy (%)

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

PPV (%)

NPV (%)

Ayhan et al. (1990) [10]

160

D&C

   

87.5

91.4

Toki et al. (1998) [11]

64

D&C

 

91

  

96

Wang and Guo (2002) [12]

156

D&C

70

  

85

34

  

H

90

  

97

57

Mencaglia et al. (1984) [13]

23

H

92

    

Lo et al. (2001) [14]

200

H

92.5

68.3

98.7

93.3

92.4

Kietlinska et al. (1998) [15]

38

H

65.8

33.3

68.6

8.3

 
  

US

77.8

75

78

  

Gabrielli et al. (1996) [16]

67

H

72

64

73

32

91

  

US

82

54

87

46

91

Kose et al. (2003) [17]

43

US

97.8

75.0

100

  

Present study

52

H

76.9

42.9

89.5

60.0

81.0

 

75

D&C

64.0

57.9

66.1

36.7

82.2

  

US

76.7

15.8

98.1

75.0

76.8

  1. D&C fractional dilation and curettage, H hysteroscopy, NPV negative predictive value, PPV positive predictive value, USultrasonography