Evaluation and Management of Postmenopausal Bleeding in a Woman with a Stenotic Cervix
Postmenopausal bleeding (PMB), defined as any bleeding which occurs greater than 12 months after the final menstrual period, requires evaluation because of the 1-14% risk of endometrial cancer. More than 90% of women with endometrial cancer initially present with PMB. The evaluation becomes more challenging in women with cervical stenosis. Cervical stenosis typically occurs at the level of the internal os and prevents entry into the uterine cavity. Cervical stenosis may also occur at the external os, which can prevent either identification of the os or passage of instruments. Cervical stenosis increases the risk of cervical laceration and uterine perforation.
The initial evaluation of postmenopausal bleeding may be either by transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) or by endometrial biopsy. In a woman with known or suspected cervical stenosis, TVUS is preferred. An endometrial thickness less than or equal to 4 mm has a 99% negative predictive value for endometrial cancer. If TVUS demonstrates an endometrial thickness > 4 mm, or if bleeding continues after a normal ultrasound, histologic diagnosis is necessary. This can be accomplished with an office biopsy or with a hysteroscopy and dilation and curettage (D&C). Sonohysterography can be helpful in identifying focal lesions. All of these modalities require passing an instrument through the cervix.
Both osmotic dilators and cervical ripening agents have been evaluated as agents to facilitate access into the uterine cavity. Laminaria have their maximal effect in 24 hours and have been used in women before hysteroscopy and D&C. Misoprostol has also been shown to be effective in assisting with uterine entry. In menopausal women, misoprostol appears to be more effective if given 12-24 hours prior to the procedure. Mechanical dilation can be achieved with small flexible dilators (“os finders”) or more rigid instruments such as a lacrimal duct probe or a 1-4 mm Hegar dilator.
Transabdominal ultrasound, performed with a full bladder can be used intra-operatively to guide instruments into the uterus and to decrease the chances of uterine perforation or creation of a false passage. Intracervical injection of a dilute vasopressin solution has also been reported to facilitate entry into the uterine cavity as it appears to soften the cervix and make it more receptive to mechanical dilation.
If these methods fail, further surgical methods can be attempted, such as incising the stenotic cervical dimple, or performing a cervical conization to resect the stenotic area.
There have been reports of the endometrium being sampled without traversing the cervix. An 18 or 20-gauge spinal needle attached to a syringe can be inserted though the vagina, through the anterior uterine wall, and into the endometrial cavity.
If all these attempts fail and the bleeding persists, a discussion about the risks and benefits of hysterectomy should be undertaken with the patient.
[No Authors Listed], ACOG Committee Opinion No. 734: The Role of Transvaginal Ultrasonography in Evaluating the Endometrium of Women With Postmenopausal Bleeding. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 May;131(5):e124-e129. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002631.
Al-Fozan H, Firwana B, Al Kadri H, et al, Preoperative ripening of the cervix before operative hysteroscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 23;(4):CD005998. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005998.pub2.
Initial Approval: August 2015, Revised September 2018. Reaffirmed March 2020
********** Notice Regarding Use ************
The Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inc. (“SASGOG”) is committed to accuracy and will review and validate all Pearls on an ongoing basis to reflect current practice.
This document is designed to aid practitioners in providing appropriate obstetric and gynecologic care. Recommendations are derived from major society guidelines and high-quality evidence when available, supplemented by the opinion of the author and editorial board when necessary. It should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed.
Variations in practice may be warranted when, in the reasonable judgment of the treating clinician, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources, or advances in knowledge or technology. SASGOG reviews the articles regularly; however, its publications may not reflect the most recent evidence. While we make every effort to present accurate and reliable information, this publication is provided “as is” without any warranty of accuracy, reliability, or otherwise, either express or implied. SASGOG does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse the products or services of any firm, organization, or person. Neither SASGOG nor its respective officers, directors, members, employees, or agents will be liable for any loss, damage, or claim with respect to any liabilities, including direct, special, indirect, or consequential damages, incurred in connection with this publication or reliance on the information presented.
Copyright 2020 The Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inc. All rights reserved. No re-print, duplication or posting allowed without prior written consent.
Back to Search Results