Randomized study comparing two techniques of conization: Cold knife versus loop excision

Gynecologic Oncology

Volumn 75, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 356-360

  Giacalone, Pierre Ludovic ^a   Laffargue, François ^a   Aligier, Nathalie ^a   Roger, Pascal ^b   Combecal, Jacques ^a   Daures, Jean Pierre ^c  

^a HÔPITAL ARNAUD DE VILLENEUVE   (France)

^b LAPEYRONIE HOSPITAL   (France)

^c Clinical Research Center   (France)

Author keywords

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Cold knife conization; Colposcopy; Loop excision; Thermal damage

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FRANCE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION;

EID: 0032795855     PISSN: 00908258     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/gyno.1999.5626     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Baldauf J J, Dreyfus M, Ritter J, Cuenin C, Tissier I, Meyer P. Cytology and colposcopy after loop electrosurgical excision: Implications for follow-up. Obstet Gynecol. 92:1998;124-130.
2. Oyesanya O A, Amerasinghe C, Manning D. A comparison between loop diathermy conization and cold knife conization for management of cervical dysplasia associated with unsatisfactory colposcopy. Gynecol Oncol. 50:1993;84-88.
3. Wright T C, Gagnon S, Richart R M, Ferenczy A. Treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using the loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 79:1992;173-178.
4. Mathevet P, Dargent D, Roy M, Beau G. A randomized prospective study comparing three techniques of conization: cold knife, laser and loop. Gynecol Oncol. 54:1994;175-179.
5. Girardi F, Heydarfadai M, Koroschetz F, Pickel H, Winter R. Cold knife conization versus loop excision: histopathologic and clinical results of a randomized trial. Gynecol Oncol. 55:1994;368-370.
6. Gardeil F, Barry-Walsh C, Prendiville W, Clinch J, Turner M J. Persistent intraepithelial neoplasia after excision for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III. Obstet Gynecol. 89:1997;419-422.
7. Felix J C, Mudespach L I, Duggan B D, Roman L D. The significance of positive margins in loop electrosurgical cone biopsies. Obstet Gynecol. 84:1994;996-1000.
8. Saunders N, Anderson D, Sheridan E, Gilbert L, Sharp F. Endoscopic localisation of the squamocolumnar junction before cervical cone biospy in 284 patients. Cancer. 65:1990;1312-1317.
9. Montz F K, Holschneider C H, Thompson L DR. Large-loop excision of the transformation zone: Effect on the pathologic interpretation of resection margins. Obstet Gynecol. 81:1993;976-982.
10. Baggish M S, Barash F, Noel Y, Brooks M. Comparison of the thermal injury zones in loop electrical and laser cervical excisional conisation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 166:1992;545-548.
11. Mor-Yosef S, Lopes A, Pearson S, Monghan J M. Loop diathermy cone biopsies. Obstet Gynecol. 75:1990;884-886.
12. Wright T C, Richart R M, Ferenczy A, Koulos J. Comparison of specimens removed by laser conization and the loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 79:1992;147-153.
13. Andersen E S, Nielsen K, Larsen G. Laser conization: follow-up in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the cone margin. Gynecol Oncol. 39:1990;828-831.
14. Kristensen G B, Jensen L K, Holund B. A randomized trial comparing two methods of cold knife conization with laser conization. Obstet Gynecol. 76:1990;100-1013.
15. Monk A, Pushkin S F, Nelson A L, Gunning J E. Conservative management of options for patients with dysplasia involving endocervical margins of cervical cone biopsy specimens. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 174:1996;1695-1700.