Gezer Sener, Kanbay Ozturk Sumeyye, Balci Sibel, Yucesoy Izzet
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey.
North Clin Istanb. 2021 Dec 31;8(6):588-594. doi: 10.14744/nci.2021.80090. eCollection 2021.
The objective of the study was to evaluate the concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) methods to diagnose cervical pre-invasive lesions and cervical cancer, and to calculate the low and high prediction rates of lesions for both methods.
A total of 241 patients who underwent LEEP after colposcopic biopsy for different indications and also known cervical cytology and human papillomavirus test results were included in the study. Clinical variables such as age, gravida, parity, menopausal status, smoking, endocervical curettage results, and surgical margins were recorded.
The total concordance between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP was 41.9%. The rates of finding a more serious lesion than in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (underestimation) for negative, Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN) 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3 were calculated as 100%, 12.8%, 14.8%, and 3.9%, respectively. Rates of finding a less serious lesion than detected in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (overestimation) for CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3, cervical carcinoma were calculated as 56.4%, 33.3%, 3.9%, and 0%, respectively. Underestimation was seen in a total of 28 patients, and overestimation was present in 113 patients. Parity was found to be the only associated factor that affected the final diagnosis for high-grade lesions in univariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio=1.234, 95% confidence interval: 1.005-1.514).
Discrepancies between colposcopically directed punch biopsy and subsequent histopathologic LEEP findings are common. New methods to reduce the inconsistency between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP are necessary to prevent patients from being under or over treated.
本研究的目的是评估阴道镜活检与环形电切术(LEEP)在诊断宫颈前病变和宫颈癌方面的一致性,并计算两种方法对病变的低预测率和高预测率。
本研究纳入了241例因不同指征在阴道镜活检后接受LEEP的患者,这些患者同时已知宫颈细胞学和人乳头瘤病毒检测结果。记录了年龄、妊娠次数、产次、绝经状态、吸烟情况、宫颈管刮术结果和手术切缘等临床变量。
阴道镜活检与LEEP的总一致性为41.9%。对于阴性、宫颈上皮内瘤变(CIN)1、CIN 2和CIN 3,LEEP发现比阴道镜活检更严重病变(低估)的发生率分别计算为100%、12.8%、14.8%和3.9%。对于CIN 1、CIN 2、CIN 3和宫颈癌,LEEP发现比阴道镜活检检测到的病变更轻(高估)的发生率分别计算为56.4%、33.3%、3.9%和0%。总共28例患者出现低估,113例患者出现高估。在单因素逻辑回归分析中,产次被发现是影响高级别病变最终诊断的唯一相关因素(比值比=1.234,95%置信区间:1.005-1.514)。
阴道镜引导下活检与后续组织病理学LEEP结果之间的差异很常见。需要新的方法来减少阴道镜活检与LEEP之间的不一致性,以防止患者接受过度或不足的治疗。