ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2026
Evaluating the effectiveness of various treatment modalities in vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (vHSIL): a systematic review.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2026. 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
Objective: Vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (vHSIL) is a premalignant condition caused by persistent infection with high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV), with approximately 10% of cases progressing to vulvar carcinoma within ten years. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of surgical excision, CO Methods: A systematic review was performed following PRISMA guidelines, with literature searches conducted in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science (PROSPERO: CRD42024578702). Eligible studies included adult women (≥18 years) with histopathologically confirmed vHSIL requiring treatment. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tools. Due to substantial study heterogeneity, a formal Results: 26 studies involving 1,705 patients were included. Pooled CR rates ranged from 55 to 100% for excision, 44-85% for CO Conclusion: No single treatment modality proved superior, with all showing high recurrence rates. These results emphasize the importance of individualized treatment strategies and further research to reduce recurrence.
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.