Search

Background: Endometrial cancer is one the most popular types of cancer in women in the world, also a common type of cancer among Iranian females. Neutrophils to lymphocytes (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte (PLR) ratios are two practical and available indicators in endometrial cancer. We examined their correlation in these patients and determined that they could be used as a prognostic factor in grading and staging this cancer. This study takes a practical approach and recommends a screening strategy for asymptomatic women diagnosed with cancer in its early stages. Methods: Endometrial cancer patients were included in this cross-sectional study based on histological findings. NLR is known as the proportion of neutrophils to absolute lymphocytes, while PLR is known as the proportion of platelets to lymphocytes. The NLR and PLR were evaluated and their relationship to the grade and stage of cancer. Results: PLR and NLR values were calculated, and the mean values were 4.917±5.870 and 16.019±18.963, respectively. NLR and PLR were more significant in group 2 patients. Additionally, a strong and statistically significant relationship existed between these two methods (p<0.001). For the NL and PL methods, the optimal cutting point was 3.66 and 13.26, respectively. The NL method had a specificity of 0.906 and a sensitivity of 0.564. The PL and NL zones had values of 0.697 and 0.725, respectively. Although there is no remarkable difference among these areas, the AUC of PL power is slightly better than the NL method. It demonstrates that they are capable of increasing detection power by more than 50%. Conclusion: This study concluded that PLR and NLR were identified as independent prognostic items associated with the stage and grade of endometrial cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) that is any irregularity in menstrual cycles causes women to refer to clinics. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and complications of endometrial ablation by the thermal balloon (Cavaterm) method with the hysteroscopy loop resection method in the treatment of AUB. Materials and Methods: The present study is an open-label, randomized clinical trial that was performed in the two hospitals, Shahid Akbarabadi and Hazrat Rasoul Akram, of Tehran, Iran, from December 2019 to October 2020. Patients were randomly allocated to the two groups of interventions by a simple randomization method. The proportion of amenorrhea (as primary outcome) and consequent hysterectomy and patient satisfaction (as secondary outcomes) was assessed using the Chi-square test and independent t test. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in the baseline characteristics. The percentage of intervention failure was statistically higher in the hysteroscopy group (24%) in comparison with the Cavaterm group [8.2%, P=0.03, relative risk (RR)=1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-2.36]. Mean ± standard deviation of satisfaction based on the Likert score in the Cavaterm group and hysteroscopy group were 4.3 ± 1.21 and 3.7 ± 1.56, respectively, that showed a significant difference (P=0.04). Assessing the procedural complications, the rate of spotting, bloody discharge, and malodor discharge was significantly higher in the Cavaterm group. In contrast, postoperative dysmenorrhea is more common in the hysteroscopy group. Conclusion: Cavaterm ablation is accompanied by a higher success rate of amenorrhea and patients' satisfaction than hysteroscopy ablation (registration number: IRCT20220210053986N1). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]