J González-Bosquet1, C Centeno, B Bermejo, P Jou, L M Puig-Tintoré, J Xercavins, J González-Merlo. 1. *Department of Gynecologic Surgery-Gynecologic Oncology, Hospital Universitario Materno-Infantil Vall d'Hebron †Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Hospitals de la Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona ‡Department of Gynecologic Surgery-Gynecologic Oncology, Hospital Clinic i Provincial de Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) treatment results in the use of large-loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), laser vaporization, and cold-knife cone biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included in the study patients with CIN lesions diagnosed at the Hospital Universitario Materno-Infantil Vall d'Hebron and Hospital Clinic i Provincial de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, between March 1991 and March 1994. Patients with unsatisfactory colposcopy were excluded from the study. One hundred twenty-three patients were included in this study: 98 patients were compared for LLETZ treatment versus laser vaporization, and 69 CIN3 patients were compared for three treatments: LLETZ, laser vaporization, and knife cone biopsy. Patients were followed at 3-month intervals for at least 1 year. Follow-up included physical examination, cervical Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, cervical colposcopy, and a colposcopically guided biopsy when required. Treatment failure (persistence or recurrence) was defined by the presence of CIN confirmed histologically by a colposcopically guided biopsy. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 34.1 years. The agreement between histology from the colposcopically guided biopsy and the surgical specimen was 60%, and the kappa coefficient was 40.7% (moderate agreement). Three cases of microinvasive carcinoma were diagnosed in patients whose initial diagnosis was CIN3 on colpobiopsy (4% of invasion in the initial CIN3 group of patients). In a comparison of LLETZ with laser treatment for all CIN grades, the unique independent prognostic factor for persistence-recurrence of the disease was the colposcopic size of the primary lesion (relative risk, 4.9; Cl, 1.33-18.45). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the LLETZ procedure for CIN treatment demonstrates an advantage over destructive methods for detection of occult microinvasive and invasive cancer. This process is a simple outpatient technique with the same failure as that of laser vaporization in all CIN grades. In the treatment of CIN3, cold-knife cone biopsy had better cure rates. Close follow-up is required in these patients, because of their risk of developing recurrent CIN or invasive carcinoma.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to compare cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) treatment results in the use of large-loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), laser vaporization, and cold-knife cone biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included in the study patients with CIN lesions diagnosed at the Hospital Universitario Materno-Infantil Vall d'Hebron and Hospital Clinic i Provincial de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain, between March 1991 and March 1994. Patients with unsatisfactory colposcopy were excluded from the study. One hundred twenty-three patients were included in this study: 98 patients were compared for LLETZ treatment versus laser vaporization, and 69 CIN3 patients were compared for three treatments: LLETZ, laser vaporization, and knife cone biopsy. Patients were followed at 3-month intervals for at least 1 year. Follow-up included physical examination, cervical Papanicolaou (Pap) smear, cervical colposcopy, and a colposcopically guided biopsy when required. Treatment failure (persistence or recurrence) was defined by the presence of CIN confirmed histologically by a colposcopically guided biopsy. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 34.1 years. The agreement between histology from the colposcopically guided biopsy and the surgical specimen was 60%, and the kappa coefficient was 40.7% (moderate agreement). Three cases of microinvasive carcinoma were diagnosed in patients whose initial diagnosis was CIN3 on colpobiopsy (4% of invasion in the initial CIN3 group of patients). In a comparison of LLETZ with laser treatment for all CIN grades, the unique independent prognostic factor for persistence-recurrence of the disease was the colposcopic size of the primary lesion (relative risk, 4.9; Cl, 1.33-18.45). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the LLETZ procedure for CIN treatment demonstrates an advantage over destructive methods for detection of occult microinvasive and invasive cancer. This process is a simple outpatient technique with the same failure as that of laser vaporization in all CIN grades. In the treatment of CIN3, cold-knife cone biopsy had better cure rates. Close follow-up is required in these patients, because of their risk of developing recurrent CIN or invasive carcinoma.