Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine how the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) compares to cold knife conization in providing an adequate diagnostic specimen. STUDY DESIGN: Between 1991 and 1995, 95 patients underwent either diagnostic LEEP or cold knife conization at Allegheny University Hospitals. The indications for the procedure were a cytologic/histologic discrepancy, unsatisfactory colposcopic evaluation, positive endocervical curettage or exclusion of invasion. RESULTS: Severe thermal artifact rendered the LEEP specimens uninterpretable in 4.4% of cases. A median number of two passes were required for LEEP excision of the transformation zone. The number of passes correlated with the amount of thermal artifact detected (P=.034). Regarding recurrence patterns, normal follow-up cervical cytology was similar for both groups: 96.7% in the LEEP group vs. 100% in the cold knife conization group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that LEEP is an acceptable diagnostic alternative to traditional cold knife conization. Thermal artifact remains a disadvantage that can be minimized by limiting the number of passes required to obtain a complete specimen.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1007-13 |
Number of pages | 7 |
Journal | The Journal of reproductive medicine |
Volume | 43 |
Issue number | 12 |
State | Published - Dec 1998 |
Keywords
- Adolescent
- Adult
- Aged
- Conization/methods
- Electrosurgery/methods
- Female
- Follow-Up Studies
- Humans
- Intraoperative Complications
- Medical Records
- Middle Aged
- Neoplasm Invasiveness
- Retrospective Studies
- Specimen Handling
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms/diagnosis