{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,1]],"date-time":"2026-04-01T17:28:42Z","timestamp":1775064522867,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":12,"publisher":"BMJ","issue":"8","content-domain":{"domain":["bmj.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["J Clin Pathol"],"accepted":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,2]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Aims<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Inadequate endometrial biopsy comprises a dilemma for gynaecologists and histopathologists alike. This study was conducted to assess the clinical merit of classifying scant endometrial biopsy into inadequate and unassessable using McCluggage criteria.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>We retrospectively classified 268 endometrial biopsies, initially reported as inadequate, into inadequate (n=74) and unassessable (n=174) using McCluggage criteria after excluding 20 cases; all taken from patients aged \u226550\u2005years with abnormal uterine bleeding attending Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals, UK from 1 January 2007 until 30 September 2012. The electronic clinical records were reviewed to find out the consequent clinical decisions and final outcomes. The follow-up period was 15\u2005months after including the last patient.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>The median age was 57\u2005years (range: 50\u201397), and the median number of visits to hospital till the diagnosis was achieved was 2 (range: 1\u20134). The final diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia or cancer was reported in 9 cases; 5 (7.1%) with an initial finding of inadequate and 4 with unassessable (2.4%); the difference was statistically insignificant (p=0.13). More patients in the inadequate category (82.4%) underwent further investigations when compared with the unassessable category (68.4%); the difference was statistically significant (p=0.029). There was no statistically significant difference in the inadequate to unassessable ratio when the endometrial thickness was \u22655\u2005mm or &lt;5\u2005mm within the Pipelle group (p=0.46) or the curettage group (p=0.34).<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Our findings suggest that categorising scant endometrial specimens into inadequate or unassessable has no clinical implications. The gynaecologist should interpret the histopathology report in the light of clinical scenario.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1136\/jclinpath-2014-202210","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,23]],"date-time":"2014-05-23T23:52:02Z","timestamp":1400889122000},"page":"673-677","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/crossmarkpolicy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["Endometrial biopsy in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: inadequate and unassessable categorisation is not clinically relevant"],"prefix":"10.1136","volume":"67","author":[{"given":"Ayman A A","family":"Ewies","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Gynaecology, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Kadry A A","family":"Shaaban","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Gynaecology, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Reena","family":"Merard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Histopathology, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Ulises","family":"Zanetto","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Histopathology, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"239","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,23]]},"reference":[{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/IGC.0b013e3181a83387"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jcp.2005.029702"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1479-828X.1999.tb03460.x"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1159\/000292573"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.5","first-page":"225","article-title":"Postmenopausal uterine bleeding of nonorganic cause","volume":"66","author":"Choo","year":"1985","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11627.x"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jcp.2004.023564"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"172","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2011.06.023","article-title":"Endometrial hyperplasia\u2014the dilemma of management remains: a retrospective observational study of 280 women","volume":"159","author":"Daud","year":"2012","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"86","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2009.09.023","article-title":"Premenopausal bleeding: when should the endometrium be investigated?\u2014A retrospective non-comparative study of 3006 women","volume":"148","author":"Iram","year":"2011","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1034\/j.1600-0412.2001.080009784.x"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(12)90744-9"},{"key":"2025121322564253000_67.8.673.12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"67","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2010.06.009","article-title":"Managing postmenopausal bleeding revisited: what is the best first line investigation and who should be seen within 2 weeks? A cross-sectional study of 326 women","volume":"153","author":"Ewies","year":"2011","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"}],"container-title":["Journal of Clinical Pathology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/syndication.highwire.org\/content\/doi\/10.1136\/jclinpath-2014-202210","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,12,14]],"date-time":"2025-12-14T06:56:47Z","timestamp":1765695407000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/jcp.bmj.com\/lookup\/doi\/10.1136\/jclinpath-2014-202210"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,23]]},"references-count":12,"journal-issue":{"issue":"8","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2014,7,16]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1136\/jclinpath-2014-202210"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/jclinpath-2014-202210","relation":{},"ISSN":["0021-9746","1472-4146"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0021-9746","type":"print"},{"value":"1472-4146","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2014,5,23]]}}}