ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Clinical and prognostic outcomes of colposcopy-guided LEEP versus cold knife conization in the management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and prognostic outcomes of colposcopy-guided LEEP compared with cold knife conization (CKC) in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Methods: 124 patients with CIN in our hospital from January 2022 to December 2023 were chosen and classified into the control group (62 cases) and the observation group (62 cases) according to the therapeutic schedule. The observation group was treated with colposcopy combined with LEEP, while the control group underwent conventional cold knife conization (CKC). The clinical effect, surgical indicators, complications were compared. The control group underwent LEEP without colposcopic guidance, following standard clinical protocol. Results: The efficacy of the observation group was markedly better than that of the control group (95.16% vs. 75.81%, χ² = 9.358, P = 0.002). The operative time (35.35 ± 2.81 vs. 56.92 ± 2.17 minutes), intraoperative blood loss (8.08 ± 0.27 vs. 16.03 ± 2.27 mL), vaginal bleeding time (7.76 ± 1.85 vs. 11.37 ± 2.45 days), and hospital stays (2.74 ± 0.97 vs. 6.73 ± 1.33 days) were all significantly shorter in the observation group (P < 0.001). The complication rate was also lower (6.45% vs. 20.97%, P = 0.019). Conclusion: The findings suggest that this combined therapy is not only more effective but may also improve pregnancy outcomes for patients, making it a promising option for clinical application.
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.