Obstet Gynecol Sci.  2018 Jul;61(4):477-488. 10.5468/ogs.2018.61.4.477.

Clinical factors that affect diagnostic discrepancy between colposcopically directed biopsies and loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization of the uterine cervix

• Jung Y
• Lee AR
• Lee SJ
• Lee YS
• Park DC
• Park EK

• KMID: 2439721
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2018.61.4.477

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine the factors affecting pathologic discrepancy and final diagnosis between colposcopic biopsy and pathology by loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP).
METHODS
Between 2004 and 2016, 1,200 patients who underwent LEEP were enrolled for this study. 667 underwent cervical cytology, human papillomavirus (HPV) test, colposcopic biopsy, and LEEP. We analyzed patient's age, menopausal status, number of delivery, abortion times, cervical cytology, number of punch biopsies, HPV type, LEEP, and interval between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP.
RESULTS
Logistic regression analysis of the final diagnosis showed that age 30-39 years and other high HPV group types were associated with cancer diagnosis, whereas atypical squamous cells cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H), high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), and HPV type 16 affected the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2. The overall concordance rate of histopathology between punch biopsy and LEEP was 43.3%. The rates of detecting a more severe lesion by LEEP than those by biopsy were 23.1%. The rates of a less severe lesion detected by LEEP than those by biopsy were 33.6%. Factors related with biopsy underestimation were as follows: < 1 vaginal delivery, HSIL, number of punch biopsies and HPV type. Punch biopsy number is a unique factor of biopsy overestimation.
CONCLUSION
Patients with ASC-H, HSIL, and HPV type 16 may undergo conization immediately without colposcopic biopsy. We suggest that colposcopically directed 3 to 5 punch biopsies may be used to determine the need for conization.

Keyword

Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Papanicolaou test; Biopsy; Conization

MeSH Terms

Atypical Squamous Cells of the Cervix
Biopsy*
Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Cervix Uteri*
Conization*
Diagnosis
Female
Humans
Logistic Models
Papanicolaou Test
Pathology
Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions of the Cervix

Reference

1. Duesing N, Schwarz J, Choschzick M, Jaenicke F, Gieseking F, Issa R, et al. Assessment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) with colposcopic biopsy and efficacy of loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP). Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012; 286:1549–1554. PMID: 22865036.

2. Giannella L, Mfuta K, Gardini G, Rubino T, Fodero C, Prandi S. High-grade CIN on cervical biopsy and predictors of the subsequent cone histology results in women undergoing immediate conization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015; 186:68–74. PMID: 25656975.

3. Livasy CA, Moore DT, Van Le L. The clinical significance of a negative loop electrosurgical cone biopsy for high-grade dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104:250–254. PMID: 15291995.

4. Rodriguez-Manfredi A, Alonso I, del Pino M, Fusté P, Torné A, Ordi J. Predictors of absence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the conization specimen. Gynecol Oncol. 2013; 128:271–276. PMID: 23116936.

5. Witt BL, Factor RE, Jarboe EA, Layfield LJ. Negative loop electrosurgical cone biopsy finding following a biopsy diagnosis of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion: frequency and clinical significance. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136:1259–1261. PMID: 23020732.

6. Ryu A, Nam K, Chung S, Kim J, Lee H, Koh E, et al. Absence of dysplasia in the excised cervix by a loop electrosurgical excision procedure in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Gynecol Oncol. 2010; 21:87–92. PMID: 20613897.

7. Kjellberg L, Tavelin B. ‘See and treat’ regime by LEEP conisation is a safe and time saving procedure among women with cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007; 86:1140–1144. PMID: 17712659.

8. Stoler MH, Vichnin MD, Ferenczy A, Ferris DG, Perez G, Paavonen J, et al. The accuracy of colposcopic biopsy: analyses from the placebo arm of the Gardasil clinical trials. Int J Cancer. 2011; 128:1354–1362. PMID: 20506504.

9. Barker B, Garcia FA, Warner J, Lozerski J, Hatch K. Baseline inaccuracy rates for the comparison of cervical biopsy to loop electrosurgical excision histopathologic diagnoses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 187:349–352. PMID: 12193923.

10. Byrom J, Douce G, Jones PW, Tucker H, Millinship J, Dhar K, et al. Should punch biopsies be used when high-grade disease is suspected at initial colposcopic assessment? A prospective study. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2006; 16:253–256. PMID: 16445640.

11. Kabaca C, Koleli I, Sariibrahim B, Karateke A, Gurbuz A, Kapudere B, et al. Is cervical punch biopsy enough for the management of low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia? J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2014; 18:240–245. PMID: 24633166.

12. Costa S, Nuzzo MD, Rubino A, Rambelli V, Marinelli M, Santini D, et al. Independent determinants of inaccuracy of colposcopically directed punch biopsy of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 90:57–63. PMID: 12821342.

13. Chen RJ, Chang DY, Yen ML, Lee EF, Chow SN, Huang SC, et al. Independent clinical factors which correlate with failures in diagnosing early cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 1995; 58:356–361. PMID: 7672701.

14. Kobelin MH, Kobelin CG, Burke L, Lavin P, Niloff JM, Kim YB. Incidence and predictors of cervical dysplasia in patients with minimally abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 92:356–359. PMID: 9721769.

15. Flynn K, Rimm DL. Diagnosis of “ASCUS” in women over age 50 is less likely to be associated with dysplasia. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001; 24:132–136. PMID: 11169895.

16. Massad LS, Behbakht K, Collins YC, Cejtin HE. Histologic findings from the cervix among older women with abnormal cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol. 2003; 88:340–344. PMID: 12648584.

17. Keating JT, Wang HH. Significance of a diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance for Papanicolaou smears in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cancer. 2001; 93:100–105. PMID: 11309774.

18. Wetrich DW. An analysis of the factors involved in the colposcopic evaluation of 2194 patients with abnormal Papanicolaou smears. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986; 154:1339–1349. PMID: 3717244.

19. Killackey MA, Jones WB, Lewis JL Jr. Diagnostic conization of the cervix: review of 460 consecutive cases. Obstet Gynecol. 1986; 67:766–770. PMID: 3703403.

20. Buxton EJ, Luesley DM, Shafi MI, Rollason M. Colposcopically directed punch biopsy: a potentially misleading investigation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1991; 98:1273–1276. PMID: 1777461.

21. Denny LA, Soeters R, Dehaeck K, Bloch B. Does colposcopically directed punch biopsy reduce the incidence of negative LLETZ? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995; 102:545–548. PMID: 7647056.

22. Stoler MH, Vichnin MD, Ferenczy A, Ferris DG, Perez G, Paavonen J, et al. The accuracy of colposcopic biopsy: analyses from the placebo arm of the Gardasil clinical trials. Int J Cancer. 2011; 128:1354–1362. PMID: 20506504.

23. Wright TC Jr, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Apple R, Derion T, Wright TL. The ATHENA human papillomavirus study: design, methods, and baseline results. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 206:46.e1–46.11. PMID: 21944226.

24. Lehtovirta P, Paavonen J, Heikinheimo O. Risk factors, diagnosis and prognosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among HIV-infected women. Int J STD AIDS. 2008; 19:37–41. PMID: 18275645.

25. Gage JC, Hanson VW, Abbey K, Dippery S, Gardner S, Kubota J, et al. Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 108:264–272. PMID: 16880294.

26. Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Belinson JL, Huang MN, Wu LY, Zhang X, et al. Colposcopically directed biopsy, random cervical biopsy, and endocervical curettage in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II or worse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 191:430–434. PMID: 15343217.

27. Pretorius RG, Belinson JL, Azizi F, Peterson PC, Belinson S. Utility of random cervical biopsy and endocervical curettage in a low-risk population. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2012; 16:333–338. PMID: 22622343.

28. Nicolas W, Joan LW, Michael AG, Katie MS, Rosemary EZ, Cara M, et al. Multiple biopsies and detection of cervical cancer precursors at colposcopy. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33:83–89. PMID: 25422481.

29. Chung SH. Cervical cancer screening after perimenopause: how is human papillomavirus test performed? J Menopausal Med. 2016; 22:65–70. PMID: 27617239.

30. Moore KN, Bannon RJ, Lanneau GS, Zuna RE, Walker JL, Gold MA. Cervical dysplasia among women over 35 years of age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 199:471.e1–471.e5. PMID: 18486088.

31. Trimble CL, Piantadosi S, Gravitt P, Ronnett B, Pizer E, Elko A, et al. Spontaneous regression of high-grade cervical dysplasia: effects of human papillomavirus type and HLA phenotype. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11:4717–4723. PMID: 16000566.

32. Dalla Palma P, Giorgi Rossi P, Collina G, Buccoliero AM, Ghiringhello B, Gilioli E, et al. The reproducibility of CIN diagnoses among different pathologists: data from histology reviews from a multicenter randomized study. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009; 132:125–132. PMID: 19864243.

33. Carrigg A, Teschendorf C, Amaro D, Weidner N, Tipps A, Shabaik A, et al. Examination of sources of diagnostic error leading to cervical cone biopsies with no evidence of dysplasia. Am J Clin Pathol. 2013; 139:422–427. PMID: 23525611.

34. Apgar BS, Kaufman AJ, Bettcher C, Parker-Featherstone E. Gynecologic procedures: colposcopy, treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and endometrial assessment. Am Fam Physician. 2013; 87:836–843. PMID: 23939565.