Cervical stenosis following electrosurgical conization

Sao Paulo Medical Journal

Volumn 126, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 209-214

  Monteiro, Aparecida Cristina Sampaio ^a   Russomano, Fábio Bastos ^a   de Camargo, Maria José ^a   da Silva, Kátia Silveira ^a   Veiga, Fernando Rangel ^a   Oliveira, Rebecca Guimarães ^a  

^a INSTITUTO OSWALDO CRUZ   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Conization; Constriction; Electrosurgery; Pathologic; Postoperative complications

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOLOGY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DYSMENORRHEA; ELECTROSURGERY; EXCISION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEMATOMETRA; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX DILATATION; UTERINE CERVIX DISEASE; UTERINE CERVIX STENOSIS;

EID: 58149475267     PISSN: 15163180     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s1516-31802008000400002     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Suh-Burgmann EJ, Whall-Strojwas D, Chang Y, Hundley D, Goodman A. Risk factors for cervical stenosis after loop electrocautery excision procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(5 Pt 1):657-60.
2. Kim YT, Kim JW, Kim DK, Song CH. Loop diathermy and cold-knife conization in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a comparative study. J Korean Med Sci. 1995;10(4):281-6.
3. Diakomanolis E, Haidopoulos D, Radolakis A, et al. Treating intraepithelial lesions of the uterine cervix by laser CO2. Evaluation of the past, appraisal for the future. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2002;23(5):463-8.
4. Wright TC, Richart RM, Ferenczy A. Electrosurgery for HPV-related diseases of the lower. Genital tract. A practical handbook for diagnosis and treatment by loop electrosurgical excision and fulguration procedures. New York/Quebec: Arthur Vision, Incorporated and BioVision, Incorporated; 1992.
5. Luesley DM, McCrum A, Terry PB, 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(2):158-64.
6. Newman C, Finan MA. Hysterectomy in women with cervical stenosis. Surgical indications and pathology. J Reprod Med. 2003;48(9):672-6.
7. Penna C, Fambrini M, Fallani MG, Pieralli A, Scarselli G, Marchionni M. Laser CO2 conization in postmenopausal age: risk of cervical stenosis and unsatisfactory follow-up. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;96(3):771-5.
8. Mathevet P, Chemali E, Roy M, Dargent D. Long-term outcome of a randomized study comparing three techniques of conization: cold knife, laser, and LEEP. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003;106(2):214-8.
9. Houlard S, Perrotin F, Fourquet F, Marret H, Lansac J, Body G. Risk factors for cervical stenosis after laser cone biopsy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002;104(2):144-7.
10. Baldauf JJ, Dreyfus M, Ritter J, Meyer P, Philippe E. Risk of cervical stenosis after large loop excision or laser conization. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88(6):933-8.
11. Prendiville W. Large loop excision of the transformation zone. In: Prendiville W, editor. Large loop excision of the transformation zone. A practical guide to LLETZ. London: Chapman & Hall Medical; 1993. p. 35-58.
12. Ferris DG, Hainer BL, Pfenninger JL, Zuber TJ, DeWitt DE, Line RL. Electrosurgical loop excision of the cervical transformation zone: the experience of family physicians. J Fam Pract. 1995;41(4):337-44.
13. Brun JL, Youbi A, Hocké C. Complications, séquelles et devenir du col traité par conisation: évaluation à travers 3 techniques opératoires. [Complications, sequellae and outcome of cervical conizations: evaluation of three surgical technics]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2002;31(6):558-64.