Goebel EA, et al. - Clinicopathologic outcomes were compared and reporting consistency was determined for endometrial samples with limited tissue. Retrospective chart review yielded 1149 patients with insufficient (49%) or scant (51%) samples with no significant difference in repeat biopsy rate. Patients with a previous insufficient sample were more frequently diagnosed with uterine malignancy than with scant (19% and 9%, respectively), but this was not statistically significant. Patients with insufficient or scant samples were reported to be managed similarly by 4 of 5 gynecologists surveyed. Performing blind review of 99 cases of previously reported scant or insufficient samples in which 4 reviewers separately reassigned cases as scant, insufficient, or diagnostic, they observed complete consensus across raters in 57% of cases. In pathologic reporting, the distinction between insufficient and scant samples may not be necessary as such. Repeat sampling in the appropriate context should be undertaken in both groups in view of the malignancy outcomes.