Which biopsy method is better for diagnosing uterine bleeding?
NCT ID NCT07366814
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study compared two common biopsy methods—Pipelle and Karman cannula—for diagnosing abnormal uterine bleeding in 480 women. All participants received the same local anesthetic to ensure fair pain comparison. The goal was to see which method provides better tissue samples and a more comfortable experience.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for ABNORMAL UTERINE BLEEDING are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
University of Health Sciences, Gaziosmanpaşa Training and Research Hospital
Istanbul, Turkey (Türkiye)
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- Can a reusable device match the standard for uterine biopsy?
- Can watching videos before surgery calm nerves?
- Can a camera inside the womb replace the need for a biopsy?
- Which cervical prep eases hysteroscopy for postmenopausal women?
- New tool could sharpen hysteroscopy training
- New stitch could speed up hysterectomy surgery