Which biopsy tool is better for diagnosing uterine bleeding? a head-to-head trial puts pipelle and MVA to the test.

NCT ID NCT07731581

Not yet recruiting Diagnosis Sponsor: University of Health Sciences Lahore Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

First seen Jul 28, 2026 · Last updated Jul 29, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This trial compares two office-based methods for taking a sample of the uterine lining (endometrial biopsy) in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. One method uses a standard Pipelle device; the other uses a manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) cannula, which is less expensive and reusable. The study aims to see which approach provides better tissue samples, causes less pain, and leads to fewer complications.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance: Pipelle endometrial suction curette or manual vacuum aspiration cannula
What this could lead to: If one method proves superior, it could offer a more affordable or comfortable option for diagnosing uterine conditions in resource-limited settings.
What could go wrong: This is a small, single-center trial, so results may not apply broadly. Both methods are already in use, and the study may not find a clear winner.

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 (AUB) are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

Metrorrhagia

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

ABNORMAL UTERINE BLEEDING (AUB)

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.