Construction and Evaluation of a Clinical Prediction Scoring System for Positive Cervical Margins Under Colposcopy.

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the commonly used surgical methods for cervical lesions include loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) and cold knife conization (CKC). However, the positive rate of surgical margins after LEEP is relatively high, which leads to disease recurrence and places further demand on clinical treatment. This study investigated factors related to positive margins after LEEP and established a scoring system to enhance preoperative risk assessment and surgical selection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 411 patients undergoing LEEP surgery for cervical lesions in the First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China (USTC), from January 2016 to March 2021, was performed. Cases were divided into a negative margin group (349 cases) and a positive margin group according to postoperative pathology. In the positive group (62 cases), single-factor and multi-factor analyses screened influencing factors; a logistic and additive scoring system was established; furthermore, a ROC curve was used to evaluate scoring effectiveness.

RESULTS

The positive rate of resection margins after LEEP was 15.1%. Univariate analysis indicated a relationship to patient age, menopause, preoperative ThinPrep Cytology Test (TCT) results, lesion quadrant number under colposcopy, cervical biopsy, and the result of endocervical curettage (ECC). Multivariate analysis showed that age >35 y, menopause, preoperative TCT being high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), four quadrants being involved under colposcopy, and ECC being HSIL were all independent influencing factors of positive margins after LEEP ( < 0.05). These were included with the above factors to establish a logistic and additive scoring system. When the logistic score was 17, the sensitivity and specificity of predicting positive margins after LEEP were 80.6 and 61.6%, respectively. When the additive score was 6, the sensitivity and specificity were 74.2 and 66.2%, respectively. Both scoring systems had good predictability (area under the curve AUC >0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

This study quantified factors influencing positive margins after LEEP and established a scoring system for evaluating patients before surgery to provide a basis for individualized treatment and selection of surgical methods.