ArticleBMC women's health2024
The value of endocervical curettage during large loop excision of the transformation zone in combination with endocervical surgical margin in predicting persistent/recurrent dysplasia of the uterine cervix: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC women's health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Residual/recurrent lesions after cold-knife conization for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: risk factor analysis and clinical management recommendations.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- ECC at LLETZ-An Exploratory Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer often originates from cervical cell dysplasia. Previous studies mainly focused on surgical margins and high-risk human papillomavirus persistence as factors predicting recurrence. New research highlights the significance of positive findings from endocervical curettage (ECC) during excision treatment. However, the combined influence of surgical margin and ECC status on dysplasia recurrence risk has not been investigated.
methodsIn this retrospective study, data from 404 women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) who underwent large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) were analyzed. Records were obtained retrospectively from the hospital's patient database including information about histopathological finding from ECC, endocervical margin status with orientation of residual disease after LLETZ, recurrent/persistent dysplasia after surgical treatment and need for repeated surgery (LLETZ or hysterectomy).
resultsPatients with cranial (= endocervical) R1-resection together with cells of HSIL in the ECC experienced re-surgery 17 times. With statistical normal distribution, this would have been expected to happen 5 times (p < 0.001). The Fisher's exact test confirmed a statistically significant connection between the resection status together with the result of the ECC and the reoccurrence of dysplasia after surgery (p < 0,001). 40,6% of the patients with re-dysplasia after primary LLETZ had shown cranial R1-resection together with cells of HSIL in the ECC. Investigating the risk for a future abnormal Pap smear, patients with cranial R1-resection together with dysplastic cells in the ECC showed the greatest deviation of statistical normal distribution with SR = 2.6.
conclusionOur results demonstrate that the future risk of re-dysplasia, re-surgery, and abnormal Pap smear for patients after LLETZ due to HSIL is highest within patients who were diagnosed with cranial (endocervical) R1-resection and with cells of HSIL in the ECC in their primary LLETZ. Consequently, the identification of patients, who could benefit of intensified observation or required intervention could be improved.
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.