Negative cone biopsies: A reappraisal

Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist

Volumn 48, Issue 8, 2003, Pages 617-621

  Diakomanolis, Emmanuel ^a   Chatzipapas, Ioannis ^a   Haidopoulos, Dimitrios ^a   Rodolakis, Alexandros ^a   Stefanidis, Konstantinos ^a   Markaki, Sonia ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Biopsy; Cervix neoplasms; Cone biopsy

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ARTICLE; CARBON DIOXIDE LASER; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUNCH BIOPSY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVICITIS; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX DISEASE; WART VIRUS;

EID: 0041919760     PISSN: 00247758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Mclndoe GA, Robson MS, Tidy JA, et al: Laser excision rather than vaporization: The treatment of choice for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol 1989;74:165-168
2. Prendiville W, Cullimore J, Norman S: Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ): A new method of management for women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:1054-1060
3. Basu PS, D'Arcy T, McIndoe A, et al: Is needle diathermy excision of the transformation zone a better treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia than large loop excision? Lancet 1999;333:1852-1853
4. Dorsey JH, Diggs ES: Microsurgical conization of the cervix by carbon dioxide laser. Obstet Gynecol 1979;54:565-570
5. Lopes A, Pearson SE, Mor-Yosef S, et al: Is it time for a reconsideration of the criteria for cone biopsy? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:1345-1347
6. Skehan M, Soutter WP, Lim K, et al: Reliability of colposcopy and directed punch biopsy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:811-816
7. Golbang P, Scurry J, de Jong S, et al: Investigation of 100 consecutive negative cone biopsies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:100-104
8. Denny LA, Soeters R, Dehaeck K, et al: Does colposcopically directed punch biopsy reduce the incidence of negative LLETZ? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;102:545-548
9. Heatley MK, Bury JP: The correlation between the grade of dyskaryosis on cervical smear, grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) on punch biopsy and the final histological diagnosis on cone biopsies of the cervix. Cytopathology 1998;9:93-99
10. Massad LS, Halperin CJ, Bitterman P: Correlation between colposcopically directed biopsy and cervical loop excision. Gynecol Oncol 1996;60:400-403
11. Ang MS, Kaufman RH, Adam E, et al: Colposcopically directed biopsy and loop excision of the transformation zone: Comparison of histologic findings. J Reprod Med 1995;40:167-170
12. Howells RE, O'Mahony F, Tucker H, et al: How can the incidence of negative specimens resulting from large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone (LLETZ) be reduced? An analysis of negative LLETZ specimens and development of a predictive model. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;107:1075-1082
13. Pitynski K, Basta A: Colposcopy and microcolpohysteroscopy qualification for large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) in the management of cervcal intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1999;20:209-211
14. Howell R, Hammond R, Pryse-Davies J: The histologic reliability of laser cone biopsy of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:905-911
15. Luesley DM, Wade-Evans T, Jorden JA, et al: Negative cone biopsies after colposcopy and their prediction. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987;94:895-900