Observational studyRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2022
When is There no Benefit in Performing a Biopsy in the Suspicion of Intraepithelial Lesions of the Cervix?
Observational study in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The 'see-and-treat' approach in the treatment of preneoplastic cervical lesions.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate whether colposcopy-directed biopsy is necessary to increase the accuracy of diagnosing cervical intraepithelial lesions in relation to colposcopy.
methodsWe performed a retrospective, observational study by analyzing medical records obtained from Hospital de Clínicas do Paraná from February 2008 to February 2018. Patients with results of Pap tests, colposcopy, colposcopy-directed biopsy, and surgical procedures (high-frequency surgery or cold conization) were included. Data such as quadrants involved during colposcopy and age differences were also analyzed.
resultsA total of 299 women were included. Colposcopy was found to have an accuracy rate of 76.25% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.4-81.1). Among the highest-grade lesions, the accuracy rate was 80.5% (95% CI, 75.7-85.3). The accuracy rates for biopsy were 79.6% (95% CI, 75-84.2) and 84.6% (95% CI, 80-89.1) for the highest-grade lesions. High-grade lesions were accurately confirmed in 76.9% and 85% of patients with 1 and 2 or more affected quadrants, respectively. For women younger than 40 years, the accuracy rates were 77.6% and 80.8% for colposcopy and biopsy, respectively. For women 40 years or older, the accuracy rates were 72.5% and 76.3% for colposcopy and biopsy, respectively.
conclusionThere is no difference between the accuracy of colposcopy and that of biopsy in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial lesions in relation with the result of conization. The patients who received the greatest benefit when biopsy was not performed were those with high-grade lesions at colposcopy, a lesion involving 2 or more quadrants, and those younger than 40 years.
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.