title: A randomized comparison of the Pipelle, Accurette, and Explora endometrial sampling devices.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Our aim was to compare the Pipelle, Accurette, and Explora endometrial sampling devices.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients (n = 248) undergoing endometrial biopsy were randomized to one of the three sampling instruments. Diagnostic accuracy, ability to obtain sufficient tissue for histologic diagnosis, and patient discomfort during sampling of the three devices were compared. When available, endometrial biopsy specimens were compared with subsequent pathologic findings at hysterectomy. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way variance of the means, chi 2, and Kruskal-Wallis statistic.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In successful biopsies there was no statistical difference among groups in specimen adequacy and there was no discrepancy between endometrial biopsy and hysterectomy pathologic findings. However, 42% of Accurette biopsies either were failed attempts or obtained insufficient tissue (p < 0.01). Pain scores were similar among the groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results with the Pipelle and Explora endometrial samplers appear to be comparable. However, given a 42% unusable specimen rate, the Accurette cannot be recommended for routine endometrial sampling.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tennessee, Memphis.
authors.forename: G H
authors.initials: GH
authors.lastname: Lipscomb
authors.forename: S M
authors.initials: SM
authors.lastname: Lopatine
authors.forename: T G
authors.initials: TG
authors.lastname: Stovall
authors.forename: F W
authors.initials: FW
authors.lastname: Ling
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001706:Biopsy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation*; D004717:Endometrium / Q000473:pathology*; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D010146:Pain / Q000209:etiology; D010147:Pain Measurement