The effectiveness of conization treatment for post‑menopausal women with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
- Authors:
- Published online on: October 15, 2012 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2012.748
- Pages: 185-188
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of conization in the diagnosis and treatment of high‑grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in post‑menopausal women. A total of 101 post‑menopausal patients who were diagnosed with high‑grade lesion CIN by biopsy and in whom conization was used as the primary treatment were examined and 202 pre‑menopausal patients were studied as the controls. Clinical and pathological data including symptoms, cytological examination and HPV DNA test results before and after conization treatment were analyzed. Both the cytological abnormalities (57.9 vs. 58.5%, P=0.260) and the positive rate of the HPV DNA test (89.5 vs. 86.4%, P=0.812) did not show a significant difference between the post‑ and pre‑menopausal group. The rate of satisfactory colposcopy was significantly lower in post‑menopausal patients compared with pre‑menosausal patients (23.2 vs. 68.9%, P<0.001). Post‑menopausal patients presented a significantly lower diagnostic consistency between colpscopy‑directed biopsy and conization (46.4 vs. 68.9%, P=0.004), and a significantly higher positive margin rate of conization (20.8 vs. 10.9%, P=0.020). A total of 10 of the 101 post‑menopausal and 2 of the 202 pre‑menopausal women were diagnosed with invasive cancer by conization and underwent further treatment. In conclusion, these data suggest that conization, as a conservative primary treatment, is not suitable for post‑menopausal women with high‑grade lesion CIN due to the lower rate of satisfactory colposcopy, lower consistency of diagnosis between colposcopy‑directed biopsy and conization, and a higher positive margin of conization.
