Outcome after conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III: Relation with surgical margins, extension to the crypts and mitoses

Tumori

Volumn 90, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 473-477

  Maluf, Paulo José ^a   Adad, Sheila Jorge ^a   Candido Murta, Eddie Fernando ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF TRIÂNGULO MINEIRO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Conization; Margin involvement; Mitoses; Recurrence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURGERY; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HYSTERECTOMY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MITOSIS; RECURRENCE RISK; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CONIZATION; UTERINE ENDOCERVIX;

EID: 9344224522     PISSN: 03008916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030089160409000506     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Huang LW, Hwang JL: A comparison between loop electrosurgical excision procedure and cold knife conization for treatment of cervical dysplasia: residual disease in a subsequent hysterectomy specimen. Gynecol Oncol, 73: 12-15, 1999.
2. Moore BC, Higgins RV, Laurent SL, Marroum MC, Bellitt P: Predictive factors from cold-knife conization for residual cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in subsequent hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 173: 361-368, 1995.
3. Pires MA, Dias M, Oliveira C, De Oliveira HM: Factors of recurrence of intraepithelial lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Med Port, 13: 259-263, 2000.
4. Schulman H, Cavanagh D: Intraepithelial carcinoma of the cervix: The predictability of residual carcinoma in the uterus from microscopic study of the margins of the cone biopsy specimen. Cancer, 14: 795-800, 1961.
5. Enterline HT, Arvan DA, Davis RE: The predictability of residual carcinoma is situ from study of cervical cones. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 85: 940-946, 1963.
6. Murta EFC, Resende AV, Souza MAH, Adad SJ, Salum R: Importance of surgical margins in conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 263: 42-44, 1999.
7. Abdul-Karim FW, Nuñez C: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after conization: a study of 522 consecutive cervical cones. Obstet Gynecol, 65: 77-81, 1985.
8. Bretelle F, Cravello L, Yang L, Benmoura D, Roger V, Blanc B: Conization with positive margins: what strategy should be adopted? Ann Chir, 125: 444-449, 2000.
9. Reich O, Pickel H, Lahousen M, Tamussino K, Winter R: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III: long-term outcome after cold-knife conization with clear margins. Obstet Gynecol, 97: 28-30, 2001.
10. Demopoulos RI, Horowitz LE, Vamvakas EC: Endocervical gland involvement by cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III: predictive value for residual and/or recurrent disease. Cancer, 68: 1932-1936, 1991.
11. Mounts MJE, Pieters WJ, Hollema H, Burger MP: Three-group metaphase as a morphologic criterion of progressive cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 167: 591-595, 1992.
12. Margariti PA, Balsamo G, Gullotta G, Rabitti C, Valle D, Mancuso S: Management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of the uterine cervix: 110 cases treated by cold-knife conization. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol, 19: 253-256, 1998.
13. Jakus S, Edmonds P, Dunton C, King AS: Margin status and excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv, 55: 520-527, 2000.
14. Reich O, Lahousen M, Pickel H, Tamussino K, Winter R: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III: long-term follow-up after cold-knife conization with involved margins. Obstet Gynecol, 99: 193-196, 2002.
15. Anderson MC, Hartley RB. Cervical crypt involvement by intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol, 55: 546-550, 1980.
16. Kalogirou D, Antoniou G, Karakitsos P, Botsis D, Kalogirou O, Giannikos L: Predictive factors used to justify hysterectomy after loop conization: increasing age and severity of disease. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol, 18: 113-116, 1997.
17. Degracia Graselli B, Roux JR: Carcinoma in situ cervical residual post conizacion en mujeres histerectomizadas. Rev Panamena Obstet Ginecol, 2: 54-62, 1987.
18. Bjerre B, Eliasson G, Linell F, Suderberg H, Sjuberg NO: Conization as only treatment of carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 125: 143-152, 1976.
19. Christopherson WM, Gray LA: Dysplasia and preclinical carcinoma of the uterine cervix: diagnosis and management. Semin Oncol, 9: 265-279, 1982.
20. Mohamed-Noor K, Quinn MA, Tan J: Outcomes after cervical cold-knife conization with complete and incomplete excision of abnormal epithelium: a review of 699 cases. Gynecol Oncol, 67: 34-38, 1997.
21. Tremont-Lukats IW, Teixeira GM, Vasquez J, Hernandez D: Validity of colposcopy to identify and grade squamous intraepithelial lesions among Venezuelan women. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol, 18: 57-60, 1997.