Factors associated with cone margin involvement in CIN patients undergoing conization-equivalent electrosurgical procedure

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 79, Issue 7, 2000, Pages 586-592

  Costa, Silvano ^a   De Nuzzo, Maria ^a   Terzano, Patrizia ^a   Santini, Donatella ^a   De Simone, Pia ^a   Bovicelli, Alessandro ^a   Bovicelli, Luciano ^a   Bucchi, Lauro ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b Romagna Cancer Registry   (Italy)

^c MORGAGNI PIERANTONI HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cervical cone margins; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Electrosurgical cervical conization; Multivariate analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ELECTROSURGERY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX DISEASE; UTERINE ENDOCERVIX;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; CONIZATION; ELECTROSURGERY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 0033919572     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0412.2000.079007586.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. 2 laser conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II-III: Complications and efficacy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998; 77: 558-63.
2. 2. Murdoch JB, Morgan PR, Lopes A, Monaghan JM. Histological incomplete excision of CIN after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) merits careful follow-up, not retreatment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 990-3.
3. 3. Ferenczy A. Electroconization of the cervix with a fine-needle electrode. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 152-9.
4. 4. Monk A, Pushkin SF, Nelson AL, Gunning JE. Conservative management of options for patients with dysplasia involving endocervical margins of cervical cone biopsy specimens. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174: 1695-700.
5. 5. Bennett BB, Stone IK, Anderson CD, Wilkinson EJ. Deep loop excision for prehysterectomy endocervical evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 82-6.
6. 6. Moore BC, Higgins RV, Laurent SL, Marroum M-C, Bellitt P. Predictive factors from cold knife conization for residual cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in subsequent hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 361-8.
7. 7. Phelps JY III, Ward JA, Szigeti J II, Bowland CH, Mayer AR. Cervical cone margins as a predictor for residual dysplasia in post-cone hysterectomy specimens. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 128-30.
8. 8. Abdul-Karim FW, Nunez C. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after conization: A study of 522 consecutive cervical cones. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 65: 77-81.
9. 9. Andersen ES, Pedersen B, Nielsen K. Laser conization: The results of treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 54: 201-4.
10. 10. Girardi F, Heydarfaday M, Koroschetz F, Pickel H, Winter R. Cold-knife conization versus loop excision: Histopathologic and clinical results of a randomized trial. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 55: 368-70.
11. 11. Luesley DM, McCrum A, Terry PB, Wade-Evans T, Nicholson HO, Mylotte MJ et al. Complications of cone biopsy related to the dimensions of the cone and the influence of prior colposcopic assessment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92: 158-64.
12. 12. Montz FJ, Holschneider CH, Thompson LDR. Large-loop excision of the transformation zone: Effect on the pathologic interpretation of resection margins. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 976-82.
13. 13. Ang MS, Kaufman RH, Adam E, Riddle G, Irwin JF, Reeves KO et al. Colposcopically directed biopsy and loop excision of the transformation zone: Comparison of histologic findings. J Reprod Med 1995; 40: 167-70.
14. 14. Chappatte OA, Byrne DL, Raju KS, Nayagam M, Kenney A. Histological differences between colposcopic-directed biopsy and loop excision of the transformation zone (LETZ): A cause for concern. Gynecol Oncol 1991; 43: 46-50.
15. 15. Lapaquette TK, Dinh TV, Hannigan EV, Doherty MG, Yandell RB, Buchanan VS. Management of patients with positive margins after cervical conization. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 82: 440-3.
16. 16. Santos C, Galdos R, Alvarez M, Velarde C, Barriga O, Dyer R et al. One-session management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A solution for developing countries. Gynecol Oncol 1996; 61: 11-15.
17. 17. Spitzer M, Chernys AE, Seltzer VL. The use of large-loop excision of the transformation zone in an inner-city population. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 82: 731-5.
18. 18. Naumann RW, Bell MC, Alvarez RD, Edwards RP, Partridge EE, Helm CW et al. LLETZ is an acceptable alternative to diagnostic cold-knife conization. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 55: 224-8.
19. 19. Alvarez RD, Helm CW, Edwards RP, Naumann RW, Partridge EE, Shingleton HM et al. Prospective randomized trial of LLETZ versus laser ablation in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 52: 175-9.
20. 20. Cartier R. Practical colposcopy. 2nd ed. Paris: Laboratoires Cartier, 1984.
21. 21. Prendiville W, Davies R, Berry PJ. A low voltage diathermy loop for taking cervical biopsies: A qualitative comparison with punch biopsy forceps. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986; 93: 773-6.
22. 22. Boonstra H, Aalders JG, Koudstaal J, Oosterhuis JW, Janssens J. Minimum extension and appropriate topographic position of tissue destruction for treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75: 227-31.
23. 23. Tidbury P, Singer A, Jenkins D. CIN3: The role of lesion size in invasion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 583-6.
24. 24. Orlandi C, Costa S, Terzano P, Martinelli GN, Comerci G, Guerra B et al. Presurgical assessment and therapy of microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 59: 255-60.
25. 25. Buxton EJ, Luesley DM, Shafi M, Rollason M. Colposcopically directed punch biopsy: A potentially misleading investigation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991; 98: 1273-6.
26. 26. Coleman D, Day NE, Douglas G, Farmery E, Lynge E, Philip J et al. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A (supplement 4): 1-38.
27. 27. Buxton EJ, Luesley DM, Wade-Evans T, Jordan JA. Residual disease after cone biopsy: Completeness of excision and follow-up cytology as predictive factors. Obstet Gynecol 1987; 70: 529-32.
28. 28. Herzog TJ, Williams S, Adler LM, Rader JS, Kubiniek RT, Camel HM et al. Potential of cervical electrosurgical excision procedure for diagnosis and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 1995; 57: 286-93.
29. 29. Ferenczy A. Management of patients with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Cancer 1995; 76: 1928-33.
30. 30. Delmore J, Horbelt DV, Kallai KJ. Cervical conization: Cold knife and laser excision in residency training. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 79: 1016-19.
31. 31. Krebs HB, Pastore L, Helmkamp BF. Loop electrosurgical excision procedures for cervical dysplasia: Experience in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169: 289-93.
32. 32. Townsend DE. Cervical cone margins as a predictor for residual dysplasia in post-cone hysterectomy specimens (letter). Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 898.