ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024
The value of endocervical curettage for diagnosis of cervical precancers or worse at colposcopy of women with atypical glandular cells cytology.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study evaluates the effectiveness of endocervical curettage (ECC) in identifying additional cervical cancer and its precursors in women with atypical glandular cells (AGC) cytology. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical records for women referred to colposcopy with AGC cytology between January 2019 and December 2023. The study included 433 women with AGC cytology who underwent both biopsy and ECC. Clinical characteristics such as demographics, clinical history, cytology, HPV status, colposcopic findings, and pathology were analyzed. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were applied to compare the characteristics of ECC-diagnosed cervical precancers or worse (HSIL+) and normal/low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL). Results: The overall detection rate of HSIL+ in this population was 19.4% (86/443), with ECC alone identifying HSIL+ in 1.3% (6/443) of cases. However, ECC showed greater utility in certain subgroups. The highest additional HSIL+ detection from ECC was observed in women with HPV 16/18 infection (7.2%) and those with AGC-FN cytology (4.4%). ECC's additional yield of HSIL+ was higher in those with normal or LSIL colposcopic impressions compared to those with HSIL+ impressions. Conversely, no additional HSIL+ cases were identified by ECC alone in women under 30 years old, those with negative high-risk HPV results, or those with type 1/2 transformation zones. Conclusion: For women with AGC cytology, ECC should be performed in patients with AGC-FN cytology, HPV 16/18 infections, type 3 transformation zones, and normal or low-grade colposcopic impressions. This approach enhances the identification of HSIL+ cases by reducing false negatives. However, for women younger than 30 years old and those with type 1/2 transformation zones, ECC offers limited benefit.
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.