Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26002493›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

Comparison of two surgical methods for the treatment of CIN: classical LLETZ (large-loop excision of the transformation zone) versus isolated resection of the colposcopic apparent lesion - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Theresa M Schwarz, Thomas Kolben, Julia Gallwas, Alexander Crispin, Christian Dannecker

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Theresa M SchwarzDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, D-81377, Germany. theresa.schwarz@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Thomas KolbenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, D-81377, Germany. thomas.kolben@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Julia GallwasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, D-81377, Germany. julia.gallwas@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Alexander CrispinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, D-81377, Germany. cri@ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de.
Christian DanneckerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Campus Grosshadern, Munich, D-81377, Germany. christian.dannecker@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn compliance with national and international guidelines, non-pregnant women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 should be treated by cervical conization. According to the definition of the large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) operation, the lesion needs to be resected, including the transformation zone. It is well known from the literature that the cone size directly correlates with the risk of preterm delivery in the course of a future pregnancy. Thus, it would be highly desirable to keep the cone dimension as small as possible while maintaining the same level of oncological safety. METHODS/

designThe aim of this study is to analyze whether resection of the lesion only, without additional excision of the transformation zone, is equally as effective as the classical LLETZ operation regarding oncological outcome. We are performing this prospective, patient-blinded multicenter trial by randomly assigning women who need to undergo a LLETZ operation for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 to either of the following two groups at a ratio of 1:1: (1) additional resection of the transformation zone or (2) resection of the lesion only. To evaluate equal oncological outcome, we are performing human papillomavirus (HPV) tests 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The study is designed to consider the lesion-only operation as oncologically not inferior if the rate of HPV high-risk test results is not higher than 5 % compared with the HPV high-risk rate of women undergoing the classical LLETZ operation. DISCUSSION: In case that non-inferiority of the "lesion-only" method can be demonstrated, this operation should eventually become standard treatment for all women at childbearing age due to the reduction in risk of preterm delivery.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) Identifier: DRKS00006169 . Date of registration: 30 July 2014.

Indexed as

ColposcopyElectrosurgeryCell Transformation, NeoplasticClinical ProtocolsFemaleGermanyHumansNeoplasm GradingPapillomavirus InfectionsProspective StudiesResearch DesignTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID26002493
PMCPMC4443515
OpenAlexW2116337750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.