The effects of loop excision of the transformation zone on cervical length: Implications for pregnancy

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 182, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 516-520

  Gentry, Dannie J ^b   Baggish, Michael S ^a   Brady, Kim ^b   Walsh, Peggy M ^b   Hungler, Melanie S ^b  

^a GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Cervical length; Conization; Loop excision of the transformation zone; Transvaginal ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; HEALING; HUMAN; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION;

EID: 0034081773     PISSN: 00029378     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mob.2000.104209     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. 1. Jones JM, Sweetnam P, Hibbard BM. The outcome of pregnancy after cone biopsy of the cervix: a case-control study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1979;86:913-6.
2. 2. Leiman G, Harrison NA, Rubin A. Pregnancy following conization of the cervix: complications related to cone size. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980;136:14-8.
3. 3. Main DM, Main EK. Preterm birth. In: Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Simpson JL, Anderson GD, editors. Obstetrics: normal and problem pregnancies. 2nd ed. New York: Churchhill Livingstone; 1991. p. 859.
4. 4. Kristensen J, Langhoff-Roos J, Kristensen FB. Increased risk of preterm birth in women with cervical conization. Obstet Gynecol 1993;81:1005-8.
5. 5. Kristensen J, Langhoff-Roos J, Wittrup M, Bock JE. Cervical conization and preterm delivery/low birth weight: a systematic review of the literature. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1993;72:640-4.
6. 6. Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE. The outcome of pregnancy after CO2 laser conisation of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100:717-20.
7. 7. Raio L, Ghezzi F, DiNaro E, Gomez R, Luscher KP. Duration of pregnancy after carbon dioxide laser conization of the cervix: influence of cone height. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:978-82.
8. 8. Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Mercer BM, Moawad A, Das A, et al. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal and Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med 1996;334:567-72.
9. 9. Anderson HF, Hugent CE, Wanty SD, Hayashi RH. Prediction of risk for preterm delivery by ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;163:859-67.
10. 10. Jackson GM, Ludmir J, Bader TJ. The accuracy of digital examination and ultrasound in the evaluation of cervical length. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:214-8.
11. 11. Ricciotti HA, Burke L, Kobelin M, Slomovic B, Ludmir J. Ultrasound evaluation of cervical shortening after loop excision of the transformation zone (LETZ). Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1995;50:175-8.
12. 12. Baggish MS, Noel Y, Brooks M. Electrosurgical thin loop conization by selective double excision. J Gynecol Surg 1991;7:83-6.
13. 13. Wright TC, Kurman RJ, Ferenczy A. Precancerous lesions of the cervix. In: Kurman RJ, editor. Blausteins' pathology of the female genital tract. 4th ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1994. p. 260.
14. 14. Cervical cytology: evaluation and management of abnormalities. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Technical Bulletin No.: 183. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1993;43:212-9.
15. 15. Blomfield PI, Buxton J, Dunn J, Luesley DM. Pregnancy outcome after large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;169:620-5.
16. 16. Cruickshank ME, Flannelly G, Campbell DM, Kitchener HC. Fertility and pregnancy outcome following large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102:467-70.
17. 17. Haffenden DK, Bigrigg A, Codling BW, Read MD. Pregnancy following large loop excision of the transformation zone. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100:1059-60.
18. 18. Ferenczy A, Choukronn D, Falcone T, Franco E. The effect of cervical loop electrosurgical excision on subsequent pregnancy outcome: North American experience. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:1246-50.