Transvaginal sonographic evaluation of cervix length after cervical conization

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

Volumn 24, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 1483-1486

  Mazouni, Chafika ^a,b   Bretelle, Florence ^a   Blanc, Karina ^a   Heckenroth, Hélène ^a   Haddad, Olivier ^a   Agostini, Aubert ^a   Cravello, Ludovic ^a   Blanc, Bernard ^a   Gamerre, Marc ^a  

^a Marseille Public Hospital System   (France)

^b Public Health and Medical Information Department   (France)

Author keywords

Cervix; Conization; Sonography; Vaginal sonography

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; CORRELATION METHODS; PATIENT MONITORING; SURGERY; TUMORS;

CERVIX; CONIZATION; SONOGRAPHY; VAGINAL SONOGRAPHY;

ULTRASONICS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; ELECTROSURGERY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR;

EID: 27744591317     PISSN: 02784297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7863/jum.2005.24.11.1483     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Buller RE, Jones HW. Pregnancy following cervical conization. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 142:506-512.
2. Erny R, Bigouroux M. The results of cone biopsy of the cervix in women who have not yet reached the menopause. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1982; 11:375-382.
3. 2 laser conisation of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 100:717-720.
4. Sadler L, Saftlas A, Wang W, Exeter M, Whittaker J, McCowan L. Treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and risk of preterm delivery. JAMA 2004; 291:2100-2106.
5. Raio L, Ghezzi F, Di Naro E, Gomez R, Luscher KP. Duration of pregnancy after carbon dioxide laser conization of the cervix: influence of cone height. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90:978-982.
6. 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; 50:175-178.
7. Gentry DJ, Baggish MS, Brady K, Walsh PM, Hungler MS. The effects of loop excision of the transformation zone on cervical length: implications for pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:516-520.
8. Paraskevaidis E, Bilirakis E, Koliopoulos G, et al. Cervical regeneration after diathermy excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia as assessed by transvaginal sonography. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 102:88-91.
9. Iams JD, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, et al. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med 1996; 334:567-572.
10. Hassan SS, Romero R, Berry SM, et al. Patients with an ultrasonographic cervical length < or =15 mm have nearly a 50% risk of early spontaneous preterm delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:1458-1467.
11. O'Connell MP, Lindow SW. Reversal of asymptomatic cervical length shortening with cervical cerclage: a preliminary study. Hum Reprod 2001; 16:172-173.
12. Leiman G, Harrison NA, Rubin A. Pregnancy following conization of the cervix: complications related to cone size. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980; 136:14-18.
13. Tan L, Pepra E, Haloob RK. The outcome of pregnancy after large loop excision of the transformation zone of the cervix. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 24:25-27.
14. Blomfield PI, Buxton J, Dunn J, Luesley DM. Pregnancy outcome after large loop excision of the cervical transformation zone. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169:620-625.