article · F1000Research
<ns3:p>Background Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) in premenopausal women is frequent, yet distinguishing benign from malignant causes remains clinically challenging. Endometrial thickness (ET) measured by transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) is well established in postmenopausal bleeding but less validated in premenopausal women due to cyclical variations. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic value of ET, supplemented by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, in predicting endometrial malignancy among premenopausal women with AUB. Methods We conducted a retrospective analytical study including premenopausal women presenting with AUB at Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia (2016–2024). All underwent TVUS followed by endometrial sampling (hysteroscopy or curettage) and definitive histological confirmation on hysterectomy specimens. Sonographic features were described using International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA) criteria. Diagnostic performance of ET was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Kaplan-Meir survival analysis was applied to time-to-consultation and time-to-diagnosis, not survival outcomes. Results ROC analysis identified ET as the strongest predictor of endometrial malignancy (AUC = 0.842, p < 0.001). An optimal cutoff of >9 mm achieved 69.2% sensitivity, 87.1% specificity, and a negative predictive value of 97.7%, effectively ruling out malignancy in patients with ET ≤9 mm. Although the positive predictive value was modest (26.5%), ET reliably stratified risk for further invasive evaluation. Kaplan–Meier analysis demonstrated that ET >9 mm was associated with earlier consultation (mean 27.7 vs. 70.3 months, p < 0.0001) and shorter time-to-diagnosis (median 12 months vs. not reached, p < 0.0001), reflecting a more aggressive clinical course. Conclusions ET >9 mm is a robust, non-invasive potential prognostic marker in premenopausal AUB, identifying high-risk women requiring urgent evaluation while safely excluding malignancy in low-risk patients.</ns3:p>
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.170554.3
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.