Obstet Gynecol Sci.  2017 Mar;60(2):200-206. 10.5468/ogs.2017.60.2.200.

Efficacy of loop electrosurgical excision procedure with cold coagulation for treating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: A two center cohort study

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
  • 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul Women's Hospital, Incheon, Korea.
  • 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Daegu Hyosung Hospital, Daegu, Korea.
  • 4Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea. ybkimlh@snubh.org

Abstract


OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) combined with cold coagulation for treating cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN).
METHODS
We reviewed clinic-pathologic data of 498 patients treated with LEEP alone (n=354), and LEEP combined with cold coagulation (n=144) between January 2000 and December 2011. After LEEP, we followed up all patients by using Papanicolaou smear and human papillomavirus (HPV) test, and evaluated abnormal cervical cytology-free interval and high-risk HPV infection-free interval. Moreover, we investigated independent factors affecting abnormal cervical cytology or high-risk HPV infection after LEEP.
RESULTS
Abnormal cervical cytology-free interval was longer in patients treated with LEEP combined with cold coagulation than in those treated with LEEP alone (mean, 92.4 vs. 84.4 months; P=0.01), and patients treated with LEEP combined with cold coagulation also showed longer high-risk HPV infection-free interval than those treated with LEEP alone (mean, 87.6 vs. 59.1 months; P=0.01). Moreover, CIN 3 and cold coagulation were factors affecting abnormal cervical cytology after LEEP (adjusted hazard ratios, 1.90 and 0.61; 95% confidence intervals, 1.27 to 2.84 and 0.39 to 0.96), and CIN 3, positive deep cervical margin and cold coagulation were also factors affecting high-risk HPV infection after LEEP (adjusted hazard ratios, 2.07, 4.11, and 0.64; 95% confidence intervals, 1.38 to 3.08, 1.63 to 10.39, and 0.43 to 0.96). When we performed subgroup analyses for patients with CIN 2 or CIN 3, the result were similar.
CONCLUSION
LEEP combined with cold coagulation may be more effective for treating CIN than LEEP alone. Moreover, cold coagulation may decrease the risk of potential of recurrence after LEEP.

Keyword

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Cold coagulation; Loop electrosurgical excisional procedure

MeSH Terms

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia*
Cohort Studies*
Humans
Papanicolaou Test
Recurrence

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Comparison of abnormal cervical cytology-free interval and high-risk human papillomavirus infection-free interval between loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) combined with cold coagulation and LEEP alone in (A) all patients and (B) patient with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or 3.


Reference

1. Lindeque BG. Management of cervical premalignant lesions. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2005; 19:545–561.
2. Ahlgren M, Ingemarsson I, Lindberg LG, Nordqvist RB. Conization as treatment of carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Obstet Gynecol. 1975; 46:135–139.
3. Wright TC Jr, Gagnon S, Richart RM, Ferenczy A. Treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia using the loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 79:173–178.
4. Loobuyck HA, Duncan ID. Destruction of CIN 1 and 2 with the Semm cold coagulator: 13 years' experience with a see-and-treat policy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993; 100:465–468.
5. Kang WD, Ju UC, Kim SM. A human papillomavirus (HPV)-16 or HPV-18 genotype is a reliable predictor of residual disease in a subsequent hysterectomy following a loop electrosurgical excision procedure for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3. J Gynecol Oncol. 2016; 27:e2.
6. Roman LD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Agahjanian A, Qian D, Morrow CP. Risk of residual invasive disease in women with microinvasive squamous cancer in a conization specimen. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90:759–764.
7. Gonzalez DI Jr, Zahn CM, Retzloff MG, Moore WF, Kost ER, Snyder RR. Recurrence of dysplasia after loop electrosurgical excision procedures with long-term follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 184:315–321.
8. Murdoch JB, Morgan PR, Lopes A, Monaghan JM. Histological incomplete excision of CIN after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) merits careful follow up, not retreatment. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992; 99:990–993.
9. Shafi MI, Dunn JA, Buxton EJ, Finn CB, Jordan JA, Luesley DM. Abnormal cervical cytology following large loop excision of the transformation zone: a case controlled study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993; 100:145–148.
10. Gardeil F, Barry-Walsh C, Prendiville W, Clinch J, Turner MJ. Persistent intraepithelial neoplasia after excision for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 89:419–422.
11. Mota F. Microinvasive squamous carcinoma of the cervix: treatment modalities. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003; 82:505–509.
12. Mathevet P, Dargent D, Roy M, Beau G. A randomized prospective study comparing three techniques of conization: cold knife, laser, and LEEP. Gynecol Oncol. 1994; 54:175–179.
13. Andersen ES, Nielsen K, Larsen G. Laser conization: follow-up in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the cone margin. Gynecol Oncol. 1990; 39:328–331.
14. Park KE, Ku SY, Kim HS, Kwak C, Kim SH, Choi YM, et al. Vesicovaginal fistula following large-loop excision of the transformation zone in a chronic systemic glucocorticoid user. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2011; 37:1459–1462.
15. Bar-Am A, Daniel Y, Ron IG, Niv J, Kupferminc MJ, Bornstein J, et al. Combined colposcopy, loop conization, and laser vaporization reduces recurrent abnormal cytology and residual disease in cervical dysplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 78:47–51.
16. Allam M, Paterson A, Thomson A, Ray B, Rajagopalan C, Sarkar G. Large loop excision and cold coagulation for management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005; 88:38–43.
17. Baggish MS, Dorsey JH. Carbon dioxide laser for combination excisional-vaporization conization. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985; 151:23–27.
18. Paraskevaidis E, Kalantaridou SN, Paschopoulos M, Zikopoulos K, Diakomanolis E, Dalkalitsis N, et al. Factors affecting outcome after incomplete excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2003; 24:541–543.
19. Herzog TJ, Williams S, Adler LM, Rader JS, Kubiniec RT, Camel HM, et al. Potential of cervical electrosurgical excision procedure for diagnosis and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 1995; 57:286–293.
20. Houfflin Debarge V, Collinet P, Vinatier D, Ego A, Dewilde A, Boman F, et al. Value of human papillomavirus testing after conization by loop electrosurgical excision for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 90:587–592.
21. Yi KH, Jeon YS, Kim BT, Kim JH, Kim BG, Park SY, et al. The efficacy of combination of cold-knife conization and cold-coagulation for diagnosis and treatment of the cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Korean J Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 40:1990–1998.
Full Text Links
  • OGS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr