Value of large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) without histological proof of high-grade cervical intraepithelial lesion: Results of a two-year continuous retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) conization has been associated with adverse obstetrical outcomes. In an approach to reduce the number of performed LLETZ procedures, we conducted this study to evaluate whether "diagnostic" LLETZ should still be performed, by analyzing their yield in terms of detection (and treatment) of real high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL).

METHODS

During a two-year study period, all patients who underwent a LLETZ procedure in our institution were retrospectively included. Study participants were divided into two groups according to LLETZ indication: a biopsy-proven HSIL group, and a non-biopsy-proven HSIL group. The results of the final histological examination were recorded, as well as excision margin status and specimen dimensions.

RESULTS

During the two-year study period, 396 LLETZs were performed, 283 (71%) of which were indicated by biopsy-proven HSIL. In the non-biopsy-proven group, final histology showed 50 cases of HSIL (44%) and 4 cases of carcinoma (3.6%), versus respectively, in the biopsy-proven group, 221 (78%) HSIL and 28 (9.9%) carcinoma (p<0.001). Regarding margin status and specimen dimensions, no intergroup difference was observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

So called "diagnostic" LLETZ allowed the detection of severe cervical lesions in almost half of cases, without increasing specimen dimensions in comparison with classical conization indications. Moreover, they also allowed an efficient treatment as showed by similar margins status. Our results therefore strengthen the idea that "diagnostic" LLETZ, when specific indications are respected, should not be overlooked as a major part of our therapeutic arsenal.