Treatment strategies in intermediate cervical neoplasia: Implications of radical surgery
- Authors:
- K. W.M. van Delft
- H. J.M.M. Mertens
View Affiliations
Affiliations: Department of Gynecology, Orbis Medical Center, 6162 BG Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
- Published online on: March 21, 2011 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2011.289
-
Pages:
575-578
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Abstract
Treatment strategies for cervical intraepithelial neoplase (CIN)2 lesions differ among gynaecologists. To evaluate the differences in management of treatment with subsequent implications, all surgical treatment strategies and follow-up methods were retrospectively analysed for patients with intermediate dysplasia of the cervix. This study aimed to evaluate expectant management strategies and the effect of biopsy prior to radical surgery in CIN2. Patients diagnosed with a CIN2 lesion at the Orbis Medical Center in The Netherlands between 2006 and 2007 were retrospectively analysed. The follow-up ended on 1st January 2009. All 141 patients with CIN2 lesions were included; 109 had no previous history of any CIN lesion. Of the 109 patients, 12% (n=13) underwent an immediate radical surgical excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ procedure) and 85% (n=93) underwent a local biopsy. After the lesion was biopsied, expectant management was selected for 59% of the patients. Subsequent smears were normal in 40% of the patients. Of the patients with abnormal smears in follow‑up, the LLETZ procedure was performed in 86% of the patients (n=25). Of these cases, persistent disease was observed in 14% of the patients. After an immediate LLETZ procedure without prior biopsy, follow-up smears were abnormal in 31% of the patients. Persistent disease was significantly lower following radical excision of the lesion with a diagnostic biopsy versus without one (14 versus 31%). After expectant management, the rate of persistent disease was 53% (p<0.001). Overall, the rate of persistent disease was 7%. Due to the high rate of persistent disease and the lower rate of overtreatment, CIN2 lesions should be treated by the excisional procedure. To restrict persistent disease, a biopsy is recommended prior to the actual treatment, since a higher rate of abnormal smears was observed in the follow‑up after immediate radical excisions in the first visit.
View References
1
|
Wright TC, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer
M, Wilkinson EJ and Solomon D: Consensus guidelines for the
management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or
adenocarcinoma in situ. American Society for Colposcopy and
Cervical Pathology. J Low Genit Tract Disease. 11:223–239.
2007.
|
2
|
van Ballegooijen M and Hermens R: Cervical
cancer screening in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer. 36:2244–2246.
2000.
|
3
|
De Bruin A, De Koning HJ and Van
Ballegooijen M: Gezondheidsenquetes. Cervixuitstrijkjes en
mammografieen, Gezondheidsenquêtes 1991 (In Dutch). Maandberichten
Gezondheid. 5:4–20. 1993.
|
4
|
Werkgroep Oncologische Gynaecologie.
Richtlijn cervixcarcinoom. National Guideline The Netherlands 1.2
(In Dutch). 2004
|
5
|
Insinga RP, Glass AG and Rush BB:
Diagnoses and outcomes in cervical cancer screening: a
population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynaecol. 191:105–113. 2004.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
6
|
Holschneider CH, Goff B and Barss VA:
Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: Management. Up-to-date version
16.1. January. 2008
|
7
|
Spitzer M, Apgar BS and Brotzman GL:
Management of histologic abnormalities of the cervix. Am Fam
Physician. 73:105–112. 2006.PubMed/NCBI
|
8
|
Östör AG: Natural history of cervical
intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynaecol
Pathol. 12:186–192. 1993.PubMed/NCBI
|
9
|
McCredie MRE, Sharples KJ, Paul C, et al:
Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer
in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective
cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 9:425–434. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
10
|
Werkgroep Oncologische Gynaecologie.
Richtlijn cervicale intra-epitheliale neoplasie (CIN). National
Guideline The Netherlands 1.1 (In Dutch). 2004
|
11
|
Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P,
Arbyn M, Prendiville W and Paraskevaidis E: Obstetric outcomes
after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive
cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet.
367:489–498. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
|
12
|
Kyrgiou M, Tsoumpou I, Vrekoussis T, et
al: The up-to-date evidence on colposcopy practice and treatment of
cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: the Cochrane colposcopy and
cervical cytopathology collaborative group (C5 group) approach.
Cancer Treat Rev. 32:516–523. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar
|
13
|
Dunn TS, Burke M and Shwayder J: A ‘see
and treat’ management for high-grade squamous intraepithelial
lesion pap smears. J Low Genit Tract Disease. 7:104–106. 2003.
|
14
|
Lindeque BG: Management of cervical
premalignant lesions. Best Practice & Research Clinical
Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 19:545–561. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
|
15
|
Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P,
et al: Management of minor cervical cytological abnormalities: A
systematic review and a meta-analysis of the literature. Cancer
Treat Rev. 33:514–520. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
16
|
Kalliala I, Anttila A, Pukkala E and
Nieminen P: Risk of cervical and other cancers after treatment of
cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: retrospective cohort study.
BMJ. 331:1183–1185. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar
|