Utility of a standardized protocol for submitting clinically suspected endometrial polyps to the pathology laboratory
Annals of Diagnostic Pathology, ISSN: 1092-9134, Vol: 23, Page: 29-31
2016
- 11Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures11
- Readers11
- 11
Article Description
The purpose of the study is to assess whether a protocol for submitting clinically suspected endometrial polyps will improve the detection rate of polyps and evaluation of the background endometrium. A retrospective review from 1999 to 2015 was performed. Cases were divided into (1) polyps and curettings placed in 2 containers (separate, n = 61) and (2) polyps and curettings placed in 1 container (combined, n = 80). Polyps were identified in 100% of cases in the separate compared with 95% in the combined group ( P =.62). The background endometrium was evaluable in 79% of cases in the combined compared to 90% in the separate group ( P =.07). The frequency of hyperplasia without atypia, atypical hyperplasia, and carcinoma was 4.4%, 3.6%, and 1.5%, respectively. In conclusion, the enhanced rate of polyp detection and evaluation of the background endometrium in the separate group is minimal. This supports the recommendation of submitting endometrial polyps and curettings combined in 1 container.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1092913416301010; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2016.05.002; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84975302322&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27402220; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1092913416301010
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know