ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Evaluation of endocervical curettage (ECC) in colposcopy for detecting cervical intraepithelial lesions.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- HPV positivity despite cytological negativity: Risk assessment with colposcopic and histopathological findings.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Additional Diagnostic Yield of Endocervical Curettage in Type 3 Transformation Zone for High-Grade Cervical Lesions: A Retrospective Analysis by Human Papillomavirus Genotype.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Enhanced diagnostic accuracy of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in postmenopausal women through PAX1/JAM3 methylation analysis.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Risk factors of human papillomavirus-related cervical lesions in postmenopausal women: a cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a predictive model for the risk of endocervical curettage positivity.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDiagnostic challenges in colposcopy arise especially in women aged 50 or older, with postmenopausal status and transformation zone type 3 (TZ3). Endocervical curettage (ECC) is a valuable tool for diagnosing intracervical lesions. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the use of ECC in colposcopy for detecting cervical intraepithelial lesions.
methodsA retrospective study was carried out of colposcopies performed in the certified Dysplasia Unit at Erlangen University Hospital between July 2016 and June 2023. Pap and human papillomavirus (HPV) results were correlated with the histologic findings via ECC, obtained during examinations or surgery. The primary outcome was the rate of accuracy between the colposcopic and histologic findings with regard to cytology, age of patients, and type of transformation zone (TZ).
resultsA total of 429 colposcopies in 413 women with histologic samples obtained via ECC were included in the final analysis. In all, 355 women had TZ3. Among patients with TZ3, evidence of high-grade lesions and invasive carcinoma was also found in women with normal or low-grade abnormal cytology. For patients with normal colposcopic findings, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 and CIN 3/adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) were found in 56 patients (16%), and invasive carcinoma was found in four patients (0.1%).
conclusionThis analysis suggests that ECC is a valuable tool in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, especially for patients who present with a normal colposcopy of the cervix and vagina but have either recurrent abnormal cytologic findings or high-grade abnormal cytology indicating CIN 2 + .
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.