ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) under local anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of 435 subsequent cases under a quality assurance program.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to analyze a quality assurance program regarding the switch from loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in general anesthesia (GA) to local anesthesia (LA) regarding patients' perioperative pain levels, patients´ satisfaction, as well as resection margins.
methodsWe performed a single-center retrospective analysis of our quality assurance program including all patients undergoing LEEP at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ordensklinikum Linz and Konventhospital Barmherzige Brueder Linz, from January 2021 to June 2024. 435 patients were questioned postoperatively after being treated with LEEP in LA regarding the perioperative pain as measured by a numeric rating scale (NRS) and patients' satisfaction. Clinical data were collected from the patients' electronic chart to investigate further parameters.
resultsMean perioperative pain levels were stated as 1.3 (1.9). Five perioperative complications were reported. In seven out of 435 cases (1.6%) an inpatient readmission or a revision surgery under GA had to be performed. A R0 resection rate of 81.4% could be achieved. In 9.7% and 8.3% a R1 resection rate was reported on the ectocervix and on the endocervix, respectively. 95.3% of patients would choose LEEP in LA as their preferred method of anesthesia for a possible subsequent surgical LEEP procedure.
conclusionsOur study showed that the implementation of LEEP in LA was successful at our department as a new standard of care, resulting in a high R0 resection status and a high level of patients' satisfaction. We encourage physicians and organizations to switch from GA to LA when performing LEEP for cervical dysplasia.
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.