Diagnostic Value of Endocervical Curettage for Detecting Dysplastic Lesions in Women with Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance (ASC-US) and Low Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (LSIL) Papanicolaou Smears

  • Poomtavorn, Yenrudee ;
  • Suwannarurk, Komsun ;
  • Thaweekul, Yuthadej ;
  • Maireang, Karicha
  • Published : 2014.04.30


Background: To determine the frequency of dysplastic lesions in the endocervical curettage (ECC) specimens of women with ASC-US and LSIL Pap and to evaluate the possible factors associated with high grade dysplasia in those ECC specimens. Materials and Methods: Two hundred and sixty patients with ASC-US and LSIL cytologic smears who underwent an ECC at the time of colposcopic examination during January 2010 and December 2012 were reviewed. Demographic and clinicopathologic data were collected. Multivariate analysis using binary logistic regression was used to identify factors that might be associated with high grade endocervical dysplasia. Results: The frequency of endocervical dysplasia was 7.7% (20 out of 260 patients). Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 and CIN 2-3 lesions in the endocervical canal were observed in 12 and 8 patients, respectively. No microinvasive or invasive cervical cancers were identified. There was no difference in the frequency of high grade endocervical dysplasia between the patients with satisfactory and unsatisfactory colposcopic examinations (1.4% vs 5.1%, respectively, p=0.087). A multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated a significant association between high grade CIN on ectocervical biopsy as well as LSIL cytologic smears and high grade dysplasia in endocervical canal (OR=0.046, 95%CI=0.007-0.288; p=0.001 and OR=0.154, 95%CI=0.025-0.942; p=0.043, respectively). Conclusions: The frequency of high grade endocervical dysplasia in women with ASC-US and LSIL cytologic smears was low. Therefore, routine performance of ECC in those women is debatable. High grade ectocervical dysplasia and LSIL cytologic smears may be used as predictors for high grade dysplasia in endocervical canal and ECC in these patients is reasonable.


Endocervical curettage;cervical intraepithelial neoplasia;endocervical dysplasia


  1. Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Belinson JL, et al (2004). Colposcopically directed biopsy, random cervical biopsy, and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II or worse. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 191, 430-4.
  2. Puntachai P, Darojn D, Chumworathayi B, Chaousriku W (2011). Comparing visual inspection with acetic acid plus random cervical biopsy plus endocervical curettage to colposcopic directed biopsy plus endocervical curettage in detecting cervical lesions in low-resource settings. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 12, 2665-8.
  3. Rose JD, Byun SY, Sims SM, Davis JD (2012). The utility of endocervical curettage: does routine ECC at the time of colposcopy for low-grade cytologic abnormalities improve diagnosis of high-grade disease? Am J Obstet Gynecol, 206, 530.e1-3.
  4. Schneider P, von Orelli S, Roos M, et al (2012). The value of endocervical curettage after conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Ann Diagn Pathol, 16, 245-9.
  5. Shaco-Levy R, Meirovitz M, Eger G, Benharroch D, Dreiher J (2013). Post-conization endocervical curettage for estimating the risk of persistent or recurrent high-grade dysplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 121, 49-52.
  6. Solomon D, Stoler M, Jeronimo J, et al (2007). Diagnostic utility of endocervical curettage in women undergoing colposcopy for equivocal or low-grade cytologic abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol, 110, 288-95.
  7. Williams DL, Dietrich C, McBroom J (2000). Endocervical curettage when colposcopic examination is satisfactory and normal. Obstet Gynecol, 95, 801-3.
  8. Massad LS, Collins YC (2003). Using history and colposcopy to select women for endocervical curettage: Results from 2,287 cases. J Reprod Med, 48, 1-6.
  9. Gage JC, Duggan MA, Nation JG, Gao S, Castle PE (2010). Detection of cervical cancer and its precursors by endocervical curettage in 13,115 colposcopically guided biopsy examinations. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 203, 481.e1-9.
  10. Goksedef BP, Akbayir O, Numanoglu C, et al (2013). Evaluation of endocervical canal in women with minimal cervical cytological abnormalities. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 17, 261-6.
  11. Khuakoonratt N, Tangjitgamol S, Manusirivithaya S, et al (2008). Prevalence of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and invasive cervical cancer in patients with low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) at cervical pap smear. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 9, 253-7.
  12. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, et al (2013). 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 17, 1-27.
  13. Miranda AD, Rodriguez R, Novoa DM, et al (2006). The use of endocervical curettage in women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or atypical squamous cells of unknown significance on Pap smear. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 10, 146-50.
  14. Molano M, van den Brule AJ, Posso H, et al (2002). Low grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions and human papillomavirus infection in Colombian women. Br J Cancer, 87, 1417-21.
  15. Moniak CW, Kutzner S, Adam E, Harden J, Kaufman RH (2000). Endocervical curettage in evaluating abnormal cervical cytology. J Reprod Med, 45, 285-92.
  16. Driggers RW, Zahn CM (2008). To ECC or not to ECC: the question remains. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am, 35, 583-97.
  17. Ferenczy A (1995). Endocervical curettage has no place in the routine management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: debate. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 38, 644-8.

Cited by

  1. Performance of HPV DNA Testing with Hybrid Capture 2 in Triaging Women with Minor Cervical Cytologic Abnormalities (ASC-US/LSIL) in Northern Thailand vol.15, pp.24, 2015,
  2. Risks of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or invasive cancers in ASCUS women with different management: a population-based cohort study vol.29, pp.4, 2018,