| Literature DB >> 36042513 |
Tao Jiang1, Yong Zeng1, Yahong Zheng1, Jing Yang1, Hua Wei1, Cunjian Yi1, Yan Liu2, Keming Chen3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors predicting residual lesion in a subsequent hysterectomy follow a cold knife conization (CKC) for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL).Entities:
Keywords: CKC; HSIL; Hysterectomy; Residual lesion
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36042513 PMCID: PMC9426006 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-022-01939-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Womens Health ISSN: 1472-6874 Impact factor: 2.742
Characteristics of patients with microinvasive carcinoma
| Patients | Age | Combine margin | Glandular involvement | HPV | TCT | Lesion range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 44 | Positive | Positive | HPV-16/18 infection | HSIL | 4 |
| 2 | 55 | Positive | Positive | Multiple HR-HPV infection | ASCH | 2 |
| 3 | 36 | Positive | Positive | HPV-16/18 infection | HSIL | 3 |
HR-HPV high-risk human papillomavirus, TCT thin-tytologic test, HSIL high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, ASCH atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude HSIL
Univariate analyses for prediction of residual lesion in subsequent hysterectomy specimen
| Parameter | Numbers | OR (95%CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Residual lesion (%) | |||
| ≥ 50 | 254 | 42 (16.5%) | 1.355 (0.886–2.072) | 0.160 |
| < 50 | 486 | 62 (12.8%) | ||
| Yes | 201 | 35 (17.4%) | 1.436 (0.922–2.238) | 0.108 |
| No | 539 | 69 (12.8%) | ||
| Yes | 13 | 3 (23.1%) | 1.959 (0.503–6.872) | 0.409 |
| No | 727 | 101 (13.9%) | ||
| Yes | 64 | 9 (14.1%) | 1.001 (0.479–2.092) | 0.998 |
| No | 676 | 95 (14.1%) | ||
| ≥ 3 | 506 | 67 (13.2%) | 0.813 (0.526–1.256) | 0.349 |
| < 3 | 234 | 37 (15.8%) | ||
| ≥ 2 | 312 | 45 (14.4%) | 1.054 (0.694–1.602) | 0.805 |
| < 2 | 428 | 59 (13.8%) | ||
| ≥ 3 | 409 | 69 (16.9%) | 1.716 (1.110–2.653) | 0.014* |
| < 3 | 331 | 35 (10.6%) | ||
| Positive | 254 | 70 (27.6%) | 5.058 (3.244–7.885) | < 0.001* |
| Negative | 486 | 34 (7%) | ||
| Positive | 568 | 98 (17.3%) | 5.769 (2.483–13.404) | < 0.001* |
| Negative | 172 | 6 (3.5%) | ||
| Positive | 408 | 79 (19.4%) | 2.949 (1.832–4.746) | < 0.001* |
| Negative | 332 | 25 (7.5%) | ||
| Positive | 191 | 38 (19.9%) | 1.818 (1.172–2.818) | 0.007* |
| Negative | 549 | 66 (12%) | ||
| CIN II | 58 | 6 (10.3%) | 0.688 (0.288–1.644) | 0.397 |
| CIN III | 682 | 98 (14.4%) | ||
HR-HPV high-risk human papillomavirus, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, CIN cervical intraepithelial neoplasia,
*Statistically significant
Multivariate analyses for prediction of residual lesion in subsequent hysterectomy specimen
| Variables | B | SE | Wald | OR | 95%CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Margin positive | 1.390 | 0.236 | 34.587 | < 0.001* | 4.015 | 2.526–6.381 |
| Glandular involvement | 1.248 | 0.445 | 7.877 | 0.005* | 3.484 | 1.457–8.330 |
| HPV-16/18 infection | 1.031 | 0.254 | 16.516 | < 0.001* | 2.804 | 1.705–4.611 |
| Multiple HR-HPV infection | 0.595 | 0.241 | 6.091 | 0.014* | 1.813 | 1.130–2.909 |
B, partial regression coefficient; SE, standard error; Wald, wald statistic; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval
*Statistically significant
Fig. 1ROC curve for prediction of residual lesion in subsequent hysterectomy following CKC for HSIL. CKC: cold knife conization; HSIL: high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion; ROC: receiver operator characteristic
Residual lesion rate in different site margin status after CKC
| Parameter | Number of patienes | OR (95%CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Residual lesion | |||
| Margin positive | 254 | 70 (27.6%) | 5.058 (3.244–7.885) | < 0.001* |
| Endocervical margin positive | 112 | 35 (31.3%) | 6.043 (3.556–10.268) | < 0.001* |
| Ectocervical margin positive | 85 | 13 (15.3%) | 2.4 (1.209–4.766) | 0.01* |
| Combine margin positive | 57 | 22 (38.6%) | 8.356 (4.419–15.801) | < 0.001* |
| Margin negative | 486 | 34 (7%) | ||
CKC cold knife conization, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval
*Comparison with margin negative, statistically significant
Rate of residual lesion with different risk factor combination
| Condition | Probability of residual lesion |
|---|---|
| Positive combined margin and glandular involvement, and HPV16/18 and multiple HR-HPV infection | 66.7% (6/9) |
| Positive endocervical margin and glandular involvement, and HPV16/18 and multiple HR-HPV infection | 35.3% (6/17) |
| Positive ectocervical margin and glandular involvement, and HPV16/18 and multiple HR-HPV infection | 23.1% (3/13) |
HR-HPV High-risk human papillomavirus