ArticlePloS one2025
Prognostic follow-up of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions of the cervix near the conization margin: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study explored the prognosis of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) patients with negative margins, investigating the impact of different distances between lesions and incisal margins in conization specimens.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 240 HSIL patients. Patients with negative incisal margins were divided into 3 groups according to the distance between the lesion and the incisal margin in the conization tissue. Group 1 consisted of a distance of <1 mm (n = 23), Group 2 of 1-3 mm (n = 15), and Group 3 of >3 mm (n = 202). For patients with lesions close to the incisal margin (≤3 cm), the decision between total hysterectomy and clinical observation was made based on patient preference following detailed counseling of disease characteristics and prognosis. Thinprep cytologic test (TCT) and HPV testing were performed during follow-up at 6 and 12 months after the operation.
resultsNo significant difference in HPV and TCT positive rate was observed among the three groups at 6 months and 12 months after the operation (P = 0.561, 0.561 and P = 0.324, 0.268). In the group with a distance shorter than 3 mm, no difference in HPV positive rate was found between the total hysterectomy and observation groups (P = 0.480, 0.737). Additionally, no difference in HPV positive rate was observed between patients who underwent total hysterectomy compared to clinical observation in groups 1 and 2 (P = 0.565, 0.692; P = 0.758, 0.593). Stratified analysis revealed that HPV positive rates at 6 months and 12 months had no statistical significance with any factor.
conclusionDifferent distances between conization tissue lesions and incisal edges have no direct impact on the prognosis of HSIL patients with negative conization biopsy tissues; excessive hysterectomy is not recommended in patients (≤3 mm) close to incisal edges.
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.