ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2020
Analysis of Conization Results in Patients undergoing Hysterectomy for Uterine Adenocarcinoma.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo observe if the histopathological result of a conization performed after cervical adenocarcinoma in situ diagnosis is compatible with the histopathological analysis of a subsequent hysterectomy.
methodsThe present descriptive and observational research consisted of the analysis of the medical records of 42 patients who were diagnosed with in situ adenocarcinoma postconization. The analysis consisted of whether there was compatibility between the histopathological reports of conization and hysterectomy and if there was an association between adenocarcinoma in situ and another neoplasia (squamous disease). Interpretation of any immunohistochemistry reports obtained was also performed. In addition, clinical and epidemiological data were also analyzed.
resultsA total of 42 conizations were performed, 33 (79%) were cold knife conizations and 9 (21%) were loop electrosurgical excision procedures (LEEPs). Of the patients analyzed, 5 (10%) chose not to undergo subsequent hysterectomy to preserve fertility or were < 25 years old. Out of the 37 patients with adenocarcinoma in situ who underwent subsequent hysterectomy, 6 (16%) presented with residual disease. This finding proved incompatible with the finding of the conizations, which had ruled out invasive cancer.
conclusionThe prevalence of adenocarcinoma in situ increased in the past years. There is still a large part of the medical literature that advocates the use of conservative treatment for this disease, even though it is common knowledge that it is a multifocal disease. However, the majority of studies advocate that hysterectomy should remain the preferred treatment for women who have already completed their reproductive purpose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.