ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2022
The value of the endocervical margin status in LEEP: analysis of 610 cases.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Risk factors for residual lesions after total hysterectomy in patients with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- The top hat procedure does not impact the management of women treated by LEEP in cervical cancer screening.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe the results of 610 patients who underwent LEEP and evaluate factors related to a negative margin.
methodsA retrospective study of patients treated by LEEP at a colposcopy referral service in Campinas, Brazil, 2017-2019. Patients were referred to treat high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or adenocarcinoma in situ suspected by cytology and colposcopy (screen-and-treat) or by biopsy. Descriptive analysis was performed by frequencies as a function of the status of the margins (negative or positive). Factors associated with margin status were assessed by regression.
resultsThe endocervical, ectocervical or both margins were negative in 82.4%, 75.7% and 65.9%, respectively. Age, sexual debut, parity, menopause status, smoking and hormonal contraception showed no difference in the proportion of negative margins. Both margins were negative in 66.1% of patients with transformation zone type(TZ) 1, 73.1% of TZ 2, and 54.7% of TZ 3 (p = 0.015). The endocervical negative margin was obtained in 78.0% of patients submitted to excision I (loop 10 mm) and 82.5% to excision II (loop 15 mm) (p = 0.016). Having the sexual debut at 18 years or older or being submitted to an excision type II doubled the chance of negative endocervical margin (1.98;1.04-3.77 and 1.95; 1.18-3.21, respectively).
conclusionThe proportion of negative endocervical margin was 78% in excision I and 86% in excision II. Sexual onset and excision type II increased the chance of obtaining a negative endocervical margin.
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.