Random biopsy after colposcopy-directed biopsy improves the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse

Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 346-351

  Nam, Kyehyun ^a   Chung, Sooho ^a   Kwak, Jeongja ^b   Cha, Sangheon ^a   Kim, Jeongsik ^a   Jeon, Seob ^a   Bae, Donghan ^a  

^a Division of Gynecologic Oncology   (South Korea)

^b Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Colposcopy; random cervical biopsy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; COLPOSCOPY; ELECTROSURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PUNCH BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VIRUS LOAD; WART VIRUS;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; COLPOSCOPY; FEMALE; HISTOCYTOCHEMISTRY; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PAPILLOMAVIRIDAE; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 77958141295     PISSN: 10892591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e3181e9635b     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Hopman EH, Kenemans P, Helmerhorst TJ. Positive predictive rate of colposcopic examination of the cervix uteri: an overview of literature. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1998;53:97-106. (Pubitemid 28079892)
2. Ferris DG, Litaker MS, Group A. Prediction of cervical histologic results using an abbreviated Reid Colposcopic Index during ALTS. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:704-10.
3. Massad LS, Collins YC. Strength of correlations between colposcopic impression and biopsy histology. Gynecol Oncol 2003;89:424-8.
4. Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Belinson JL, Huang MN, Wu LY, Zhang X, et al. Colposcopically directed biopsy, random cervical biopsy, and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II or worse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:430-4. (Pubitemid 39178694)
5. Massad LS, Halperin CJ, Bitterman P. Correlation between colposcopically directed biopsy and cervical loop excision. Gynecol Oncol 1996;60:400-3. (Pubitemid 26077625)
6. Jeronimo J, Massad LS, Schiffman M, National Institutes of Health/American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Research Group. Visual appearance of the uterine cervix: correlation with human papillomavirus detection and type. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;197:47.e1-8. (Pubitemid 47001848)
7. Gage JC, Hanson VW, Abbey K, Dippery S, Gardner S, Kubota J, et al. Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:264-72. (Pubitemid 44305665)
8. Nam K, Chung S, Kim J, Jeon S, Bae D. Factors associated with HPV persistence after conization in patients with negative margins. J Gynecol Oncol 2009;20:91-5.
9. Buxton EJ, Luesley DM, Shafi MI, Rollason M. Colposcopically directed punch biopsy: a potentially misleading investigation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991;98:1273-6.
10. Howe DT, Vincenti AC. Is large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) more accurate than colposcopically directed punch biopsy in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1991;98:588-91.
11. ASCUS-LSIL Traige Study Group. Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1383-92. (Pubitemid 36741263)
12. Mitchell MF, Schottenfeld D, Tortolero-Luna G, Cantor SB, Richards-Kortum R. Colposcopy for the diagnosis of squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:626-31. (Pubitemid 28153058)
13. Kierkegaard O, Byralsen C, Hansen KC, Frandsen KH, Frydenberg M. Association between colposcopic findings and histology in cervical lesions: the significance of the size of the lesion. Gynecol Oncol 1995;57:66-71.
14. ShermanME,Wang SS, Tarone R, Rich L, Schiffman M. Histopathologic extent of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 lesions in the atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion triage study: implications for subject safety and lead-time bias. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:372-9. (Pubitemid 36427999)
15. Belinson JL, Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Wu LY, Qiao YL, Elson P. Cervical cancer screening by simple visual inspection after acetic acid. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:441-4.
16. Tidbury P, Singer A, Jenkins D. CIN 3: the role of lesion size in invasion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99:583-6.
17. Pretorius RG, Belinson JL, Zhang WH, Burchette RJ, Elson P, Qiao YL. The colposcopic impression. Is it influenced by the colposcopist's knowledge of the findings on the referral Papanicolaou smear? J Reprod Med 2001;46:724-8. (Pubitemid 32801995)
18. Jeronimo J, Massad LS, Castle PE, Wacholder S, Schiffman M, National Institutes of HealthVAmerican Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Research Group. Interobserver agreement in the evaluation of digitized cervical images. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:833-40. (Pubitemid 47508748)
19. Louwers JA, Kocken M, van der Bijl JC, Berkhof J, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ, et al. Colposcopic characteristics of high-risk human papillomavirus-related cervical lesions. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2010;14:49-55.
20. Moniak CW, Kutzner S, Adam E, Harden J, Kaufman RH. Endocervical curettage in evaluating abnormal cervical cytology. J Reprod Med 2000;45:285-92. (Pubitemid 30238160)
21. Urcuyo R, Rome RM, Nelson JH Jr. Some observations on the value of endocervical curettage performed as an integral part of colposcopic examination of patients with abnormal cervical cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1977;128: 787-92. (Pubitemid 8162779)