Search

ABSTRACT Objective To assess pain and overall experience of transvaginal sonography ( TVS) in asymptomatic postmenopausal women. Methods In the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening ( UKCTOCS), 50 639 postmenopausal women were randomized to undergo annual TVS at 13 trial centers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Together with the appointment letter for their annual scan, a random sample of 150 women per center was sent a detailed 48-item postal questionnaire regarding the screening experience. It included a specific question about pain using a score of 0-5, where 5 was severe pain and 3 was discomfort. To assess factors that might affect a woman's reported pain experience, the pain score was regressed on age, hormone replacement therapy use, body mass index, a history of hysterectomy, prolonged scanning time, ovarian visualization, scan result, sonographer's visualization rates and opinion of the women regarding the sonographer who performed the scan. Results Between 7 July and 9 September 2009, 1950 randomly chosen women (150 per regional center) were sent the questionnaire. Of the 800 (41.0%) who returned the questionnaire, 651 could be linked to their TVS appointment. One-hundred and fifty-two (23.3%) women reported pain/discomfort (score 3-5) during TVS and 473 (72.7%) reported no discomfort (score 0-2). Only 23 (3.5%) women reported experiencing moderate/severe pain. Increasing discomfort/pain was independently associated with a history of hysterectomy and participant's reporting of prolonged scan time. Women who experienced pain on TVS were less compliant (odds ratio = 0.87) with the following year's scan compared with those who did not experience pain. Conclusions The majority of postmenopausal women found TVS acceptable. Pain influenced compliance and correlated with women's perception of increased scanning time and previous hysterectomy.Copyright © 2012 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increase in the worldwide incidence of endometrial cancer relates to rising obesity, falling fertility, and the ageing of the population. Transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) is a possible screening test, but there have been no large-scale studies. We report the performance of TVS screening in a large cohort., Methods: We did a nested case-control study of postmenopausal women who underwent TVS in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) following recruitment between April 17, 2001, and Sept 29, 2005. Endometrial thickness and endometrial abnormalities were recorded, and follow-up, through national registries and a postal questionnaire, documented the diagnosis of endometrial cancer. Our primary outcome measure was endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). Performance characteristics of endometrial thickness and abnormalities for detection of endometrial cancer within 1 year of TVS were calculated. Epidemiological variables were used to develop a logistic regression model and assess a screening strategy for women at higher risk. Our study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00058032, and with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial register, number ISRCTN22488978., Findings: 48,230 women underwent TVS in the UKCTOCS prevalence screen. 9078 women were ineligible because they had undergone a hysterectomy and 2271 because their endometrial thickness had not been recorded; however, 157 of these women had an endometrial abnormality on TVS and were included in the analysis. Median follow-up was 5·11 years (IQR 4·05-5·95). 136 women with endometrial cancer or AEH within 1 year of TVS were included in our primary analysis. The optimum endometrial thickness cutoff for endometrial cancer or AEH was 5·15 mm, with sensitivity of 80·5% (95% CI 72·7-86·8) and specificity of 86·2% (85·8-86·6). Sensitivity and specificity at a 5 mm or greater cutoff were 80·5% (72·7-86·8) and 85·7% (85·4-86·2); for women with a 5 mm or greater cutoff plus endometrial abnormalities, the sensitivity and specificity were 85·3% (78·2-90·8) and 80·4% (80·0-80·8), respectively. For a cutoff of 10 mm or greater, sensitivity and specificity were 54·1% (45·3-62·8) and 97·2% (97·0-97·4). When our analysis was restricted to the 96 women with endometrial cancer or AEH who reported no symptoms of postmenopausal bleeding at the UKCTOCS scan before diagnosis and had an endometrial thickness measurement available, a cutoff of 5 mm achieved a sensitivity of 77·1% (67·8-84·3) and specificity of 85·8% (85·7-85·9). The logistic regression model identified 25% of the population as at high risk and 39·5% of endometrial cancer or AEH cases were identified within this high risk group. In this high-risk population, a cutoff at 6·75 mm achieved sensitivity of 84·3% (71·4-93·0) and specificity of 89·9% (89·3-90·5)., Interpretation: Our findings show that TVS screening for endometrial cancer has good sensitivity in postmenopausal women. The burden of diagnostic procedures and false-positive results can be reduced by limiting screening to a higher-risk group. The role of population screening for endometrial cancer remains uncertain, but our findings are of immediate value in the management of increased endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women undergoing pelvic scans for reasons other than vaginal bleeding., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)