• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估宫颈涂片、宫颈活检和锥形切除术结果的一致性比。

Evaluation of the consistency ratios of cervical smear, cervical biopsy and conization results.

机构信息

Kutahya Health Sciences University, Turkey.

Kutahya Evliya Celebi Education and Research Hospital, Turkey.

出版信息

Ginekol Pol. 2021;92(11):778-783. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0051. Epub 2021 Apr 29.

DOI:10.5603/GP.a2021.0051
PMID:33914320
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Possible discrepancies between the cervical smear, biopsy histology and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) results of the same patient is a matter of debate in the literature. In this study, we investigate the degree to which these results differ, and the clinical reasons for these differences.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

With a retrospective design, cervical smear, cervical biopsy and LEEP results of patients were compared in terms of consistency. One hundred sixty-four patients who underwent till LEEP procedure due to pathologic initial smear and biopsy results between January 2015 and March 2020 were included in the study.

RESULTS

Exact diagnosis discrepancy and high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) discrepancy were 78.9% and 50.0% between smear and cervical biopsy, 64.6% and 31.7% between cervical smear and LEEP and 43.8% and 28.1% between cervical biopsy and LEEP results, respectively. Age did not affect the consistency rates of pathologic results between smear-biopsy (p = 0.408) and biopsy-LEEP (p = 0.590). However, the probability of the consistency of smear and LEEP results exhibited a statistically significant linear relation with age (OR = 1.043, p = 0.015). HPV infections did not affect the discrepancy between smear-biopsy (p = 0.533), smear-LEEP (p = 1.000) and biopsy-LEEP (p = 0.529).

CONCLUSIONS

Smear technique has a serious discrepancy and under-diagnosis problem when its results are compared with biopsy and LEEP. The consistency between smear and LEEP results appears to improve with age. When HSIL is evaluated in terms of detection, this discrepancy decreases. A smear test can detect HSIL and carcinoma with a higher accuracy than low-grade lesions.

摘要

目的

同一患者的宫颈涂片、活检组织学和环形电切术(LEEP)结果之间可能存在差异,这在文献中存在争议。本研究旨在调查这些结果的差异程度以及这些差异的临床原因。

材料与方法

采用回顾性设计,比较了 164 例因病理初始涂片和活检结果于 2015 年 1 月至 2020 年 3 月行 LEEP 术的患者的宫颈涂片、宫颈活检和 LEEP 结果的一致性。

结果

涂片与宫颈活检之间的准确诊断差异和高级别鳞状上皮内病变(HSIL)差异分别为 78.9%和 50.0%,涂片与 LEEP 之间分别为 64.6%和 31.7%,活检与 LEEP 之间分别为 43.8%和 28.1%。年龄不影响涂片-活检(p=0.408)和活检-LEEP(p=0.590)之间的病理结果一致性率。然而,涂片和 LEEP 结果的一致性概率与年龄呈统计学显著线性关系(OR=1.043,p=0.015)。HPV 感染不影响涂片-活检(p=0.533)、涂片-LEEP(p=1.000)和活检-LEEP(p=0.529)之间的差异。

结论

与活检和 LEEP 相比,涂片技术在其结果方面存在严重的差异和诊断不足的问题。随着年龄的增长,涂片和 LEEP 结果之间的一致性似乎有所提高。在评估 HSIL 的检测时,这种差异会减小。涂片检查对 HSIL 和癌的检测准确率高于低级别病变。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of the consistency ratios of cervical smear, cervical biopsy and conization results.评估宫颈涂片、宫颈活检和锥形切除术结果的一致性比。
Ginekol Pol. 2021;92(11):778-783. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2021.0051. Epub 2021 Apr 29.
2
Histopathological discrepancies between colposcopy-directed biopsy and LEEP-conization observed during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间观察到的阴道镜引导活检与宫颈环形电切术锥切术之间的组织病理学差异。
Ginekol Pol. 2023;94(1):12-18. doi: 10.5603/GP.a2022.0081. Epub 2022 Aug 31.
3
Clinical factors that affect diagnostic discrepancy between colposcopically directed biopsies and loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization of the uterine cervix.影响阴道镜引导下活检与子宫颈环形电切术锥切术诊断差异的临床因素。
Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2018 Jul;61(4):477-488. doi: 10.5468/ogs.2018.61.4.477. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
4
Risk Factor Analysis of Persistent High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion After Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure Conization.环形电切术锥切术后持续性高级别鳞状上皮内病变的危险因素分析。
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2019 Jan;23(1):24-27. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000444.
5
A Large Retrospective Study of 12714 Cases of LEEP Conization Focusing on Cervical Cancer That Colposcopy-Directed Biopsy Failed to Detect.一项针对 12714 例 LEEP 锥切术的大型回顾性研究,重点关注阴道镜指导下活检未能检测到的宫颈癌。
Biomed Res Int. 2018 Apr 30;2018:5138232. doi: 10.1155/2018/5138232. eCollection 2018.
6
A LEEP cervical conization is rarely indicated for a two-step discrepancy.利普刀宫颈锥切术很少用于二度差异的情况。
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2007 Jul;11(3):134-7. doi: 10.1097/01.lgt.0000265776.29173.e1.
7
Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion.单极电刀锥切术与环形电刀切除术治疗高级别鳞状上皮内病变的比较
Front Surg. 2021 Sep 20;8:721545. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2021.721545. eCollection 2021.
8
[Discussion on the diagnosis and treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in post-menopausal women].[绝经后女性高级别鳞状上皮内病变的诊断与治疗探讨]
Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Jun 25;54(6):393-398. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2019.06.007.
9
A comparison study of post-operative infection analysis of cold-knife conization and loop electrosurgical excision procedure for cervical high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.宫颈高级别鳞状上皮内病变冷刀锥切术与宫颈环形电切术术后感染分析的对比研究
Transl Cancer Res. 2020 Feb;9(2):949-957. doi: 10.21037/tcr.2019.12.34.
10
Negative loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) following cervical biopsy diagnosis of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.宫颈活检诊断为高级别鳞状上皮内病变后行阴性环电刀切除术(LEEP)
Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2021 Dec 15;14(12):1148-1154. eCollection 2021.

引用本文的文献

1
Recurrence After Biopsy-Confirmed Cervical High-Grade Intraepithelial Lesion Followed by Negative Conization: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.活检证实的宫颈高级别上皮内病变(CIN)后阴性锥切术后复发:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2024 Jan 1;28(1):26-31. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000779. Epub 2023 Nov 4.