ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Residual/recurrent lesions after cold-knife conization for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: risk factor analysis and clinical management recommendations.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the risk factors of residual/recurrent lesions of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 (CIN2/3) in patients who underwent cold-knife conization (CKC). Methods: A total of 976 patients with CIN2/3 who were treated with CKC were retrospectively analyzed. Post-CKC follow-up involved a thin-prep cytology test (TCT) and human papillomavirus (HPV) tests. Residual/recurrent lesions after CKC (RLC) were defined as biopsy-proven CIN2/3 during follow-up, whereas residual lesions identified after a hysterectomy (RLH) were defined as lesions in patients who underwent a hysterectomy 1-6 months after CKC and were diagnosed with CIN 2/3, cervical carcinoma Results: During the follow-up period, 152/976 (15.57%) of the patients underwent a hysterectomy and the remaining 824 patients completed their continuous follow-up. Of these, 45/824 (5.46%) were diagnosed with RLC and 53/152 (34.87%) of the patients who underwent a hysterectomy were diagnosed with RLH. RLC was significantly associated with factors such as persistent HPV infection, HPV infection types (preoperative and postoperative), TCT test (6-month postoperative), postoperative margins, and ECC results ( Conclusion: Risk factors associated with RLC and RLH must be considered when implementing targeted clinical interventions. Elongating the clinical follow-up period is of paramount importance, particularly for patients with high-risk factors; therefore, it is recommended that follow-up intervals be reduced. For patients with HPV16/18 infection, positive margins, and positive ECC, it is recommended that a hysterectomy be performed whenever necessary.
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.