BACKGROUND: Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is the most common pre-malignant lesion. Atypical squamous changes occur in the transformation zone of the cervix with mild, moderate or severe changes described by their depth (CIN 1, 2 or 3). Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia is treated by local ablation or lower morbidity excision techniques. Choice of treatment depends on the grade and extent of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative surgical treatments for CIN. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to April 2009). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of alternative surgical treatments in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risks of bias. Risk ratios that compared residual disease after the follow-up examination and adverse events in women who received one of either laser ablation, laser conisation, large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), knife conisation or cryotherapy were pooled in random-effects model meta-analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials were included. Seven surgical techniques were tested in various comparisons. No significant differences in treatment failures were demonstrated in terms of persistent disease after treatment. Large loop excision of the transformation zone appeared to provide the most reliable specimens for histology with the least morbidity. Morbidity was lower than with laser conisation, although the trials did not provide data for every outcome measure. There were not enough data to assess the effect on morbidity when compared with laser ablation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that there is no obvious superior surgical technique for treating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in terms of treatment failures or operative morbidity.
BACKGROUND:Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is the most common pre-malignant lesion. Atypical squamous changes occur in the transformation zone of the cervix with mild, moderate or severe changes described by their depth (CIN 1, 2 or 3). Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia is treated by local ablation or lower morbidity excision techniques. Choice of treatment depends on the grade and extent of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of alternative surgical treatments for CIN. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE and EMBASE (up to April 2009). We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of alternative surgical treatments in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risks of bias. Risk ratios that compared residual disease after the follow-up examination and adverse events in women who received one of either laser ablation, laser conisation, large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), knife conisation or cryotherapy were pooled in random-effects model meta-analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-nine trials were included. Seven surgical techniques were tested in various comparisons. No significant differences in treatment failures were demonstrated in terms of persistent disease after treatment. Large loop excision of the transformation zone appeared to provide the most reliable specimens for histology with the least morbidity. Morbidity was lower than with laser conisation, although the trials did not provide data for every outcome measure. There were not enough data to assess the effect on morbidity when compared with laser ablation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that there is no obvious superior surgical technique for treating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in terms of treatment failures or operative morbidity.
Authors: L O Vejerslev; L Schouenborg; F Sørensen; D Nielsen; S S Sørensen; B R Juhl; C Rygaard; J Junge Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: A Berget; B Andreasson; J E Bock; E Bostofte; S Hebjørn; L Isager-Sally; T Philipsen; A Schantz; T Weber Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 1987 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: R D Alvarez; C W Helm; R P Edwards; R W Naumann; E E Partridge; H M Shingleton; J A McGee; J B Hall; R V Higgins; J M Malone Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 1994-02 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Ricardo Rosales; Mario López-Contreras; Carlos Rosales; Jose-Roberto Magallanes-Molina; Roberto Gonzalez-Vergara; Jose Martin Arroyo-Cazarez; Antonio Ricardez-Arenas; Armando Del Follo-Valencia; Santiago Padilla-Arriaga; Miriam Veronica Guerrero; Miguel Angel Pirez; Claudia Arellano-Fiore; Freddy Villarreal Journal: Hum Gene Ther Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.695
Authors: Bruno O Fonseca; Júlio C Possati-Resende; Mila P Salcedo; Kathleen M Schmeler; Guilherme S Accorsi; José H T G Fregnani; Marcio Antoniazzi; Naitielle P Pantano; Iara V V Santana; Graziela M Matsushita; Ricardo Dos Reis Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Kai-Erik Uleberg; Ane Cecilie Munk; Cato Brede; Einar Gudlaugsson; Bianca van Diermen; Ivar Skaland; Anais Malpica; Emiel Am Janssen; Anne Hjelle; Jan Pa Baak Journal: Proteome Sci Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 2.480