Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common gynecological disorder in women. It is vital to establish the correct diagnosis, hence in this regard we have studied the utility of hysteroscopy as a diagnostic procedure along with blind dilatation and curettage. The objectives of the study were hysteroscopic evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding in reproductive and post–menopausal women. Hysteroscopic findings were compared with the histopathological reports following blind dilatation and curettage.

Methods: It is a prospective study on 50 women with symptoms of AUB . Detailed history and clinical examination with an ultrasound (USG) of pelvis to see for endometrial thickness and any structural abnormality was done. 50 cases were underwent for hysteroscopy. Endometrial biopsy was taken by blind dilation and curettage (D & C) and sent for histopathological examination (HPE). The hysteroscopic and histopathological findings were analyzed.

Results: Both hysteroscopy and (D & C) were accurate when an abnormality was diagnosed, giving a specificity of 96% and 100% respectively . The ability to diagnose a lesion was more with hysteroscopy i.e. sensitivity in comparison to curettage, (95.4% versus 100%). In intracavitary lesions like polyp, hysteroscopy gave 100% accuracy.

Conclusions: Hysteroscopy is a sensitive diagnostic procedure that provides useful information in all intracavitary lesions and has a higher sensitivity and specificity. A blind D & C for AUB may miss focal lesions including endometrial carcinoma, hence hysteroscopy is advisable.