Article Data

  • Views 532
  • Dowloads 115

Original Research

Open Access

Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Diagnosed by Colposcopy-Directed Biopsy with More Severe Lesions Undetected

  • Fengyi Xiao1
  • Long Sui1,*,

1Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, P. R. China

DOI: 10.31083/j.ejgo.2020.04.5319 Vol.41,Issue 4,August 2020 pp.617-621

Submitted: 24 July 2019 Accepted: 08 October 2019

Published: 15 August 2020

*Corresponding Author(s): Long Sui E-mail: suilong01@sohu.com

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to explore the factors involved in high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or more severe lesions undetected by colposcopy-directed biopsy (CDB). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 2,427 patients diagnosed with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) by CDB. After undergoing the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP), 2,023 patients were classified as having LSIL (group A), 393 as having HSIL (group B), 6 as having squamous cell carcinoma (group C), and 5 as having adenocarcinoma in situ and adenocarcinoma (group D). Results: The patients in groups D (47.6 ± 4.0) and B (39.7 ± 8.2) were significantly older (p < 0.01) than those in group A (37.6 ± 8.4). The proportion of multicentricity detected by CDB was significantly higher in group B (13.2%) than in group A (8.6%) (p = 0.003). CDB detected glandular involvement (GI) in 0.35% of the patients in group A, 0.51% in group B, and none in groups C and D (p = 0.964). The circumference, width, and length of LEEP specimens were significantly higher (p = 0.000, p = 0.011, and p = 0.000, respectively) in group B (2.8 ± 0.8 cm, 0.75 ± 0.24 cm, and 1.23 ± 0.29 cm, respectively) than in group A (2.6 ± 0.9 cm, 0.72 ± 0.23 cm, and 1.13 ± 0.31 cm, respectively), which are indicative of the presence of larger lesions in group B. Conclusion: Older age, but not GI, in patients diagnosed with LSIL by CDB is indicative of HSIL+ lesions. CDB-diagnosed LSIL patients with large lesion sizes and multicentric lesions may have occult HSIL.

Keywords

Colposcopy; Age; LSIL; Multicentricity; Glandular involvement

Cite and Share

Fengyi Xiao,Long Sui. Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Diagnosed by Colposcopy-Directed Biopsy with More Severe Lesions Undetected. European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology. 2020. 41(4);617-621.

References

[1] Solomon D., Davey D., Kurman R., Moriarty A., O’Connor D., Prey M., et al.: ”The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology”. JAMA, 2002, 287, 2114.

[2] Ferlay J., Soerjomataram I., Dikshit R., Eser S., Mathers C., Rebelo M., et al.: ”Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012”. Int J Cancer, 2015, 136, E359.

[3] Rouzier R.: ”[Management of CIN1]”. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Re­prod (Paris), 2008, [37 Suppl 1], S114.

[4] Ye J., Cheng B., Cheng Y.F., Yao Y.L., Xie X., Lu W.G., et al.: ”Prognostic value of human papillomavirus 16/18 genotyping in low­grade cervical lesions preceded by mildly abnormal cytology”. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B, 2017, 18, 249.

[5] Nogara P.R., Manfroni L.A., Consolaro M.E.: ”Frequency of cer­vical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse in women with a persistent low­-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion seen by Papan­ icolaou smears”. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2013, 288, 1125.

[6] Massad L.S., Einstein M.H., Huh W.K., Katki H.A., Kinney W.K., Schiffman M., et al.: ”2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors”. Obstet Gynecol, 2013, 121, 829.

[7] Katki H.A., Gage J.C., Schiffman M., Castle P.E., Fetterman B., Poitras N.E., et al.: ”Follow-­up testing after colposcopy: five­-year risk of CIN 2+ after a colposcopic diagnosis of CIN 1 or less”. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2013, 17, S69.

[8] Tai Y.J., Chen Y.Y., Hsu H.C., Chiang C.J., You S.L., Chen H.C., et al.: ”Clinical management and risk reduction in women with low­-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology: A population­based cohort study”. PLoS One, 2017, 12, e0188203.

[9] Nagi C.S., Schlosshauer P.W.: ”Endocervical glandular involve­ ment is associated with high­grade SIL”. Gynecol Oncol, 2006, 102, 240.

[10] Kir G., Karabulut M.H., Topal C.S., Yilmaz M.S.: ”Endocervi­ cal glandular involvement, positive endocervical surgical margin and multicentricity are more often associated with high­grade than low­grade squamous intraepithelial lesion”. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2012, 38, 1206.

[11] Guducu N., Sidar G., Bassullu N., Turkmen I., Dunder I.: ”Endocer­ vical glandular involvement, multicentricity, and extent of the dis­ease are features of high­grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia”. Ann Diagn Pathol, 2013, 17, 345.

[12] Paraskevaidis E., Lolis E.D., Koliopoulos G., Alamanos Y., Fotiou S., Kitchener H.C.: ”Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia outcomes af­ter large loop excision with clear margins”. Obstet Gynecol, 2000, 95, 828.

[13] Darragh T.M., Colgan T.J., Cox J.T., Heller D.S., Henry M.R., Luff R.D., et al.: ”The Lower Anogenital Squamous Terminology Stan­dardization Project for HPV­Associated Lesions: background and consensus recommendations from the College of American Patholo­ gists and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathol­ ogy”. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2012, 16, 205.

[14] Xiao F.­Y., Xie F., Sui L.: ”Diagnostic accuracy of colposcopically directed biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure for cer­vical lesions”. Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, 2018, 2, 137.

[15] Zuchna C., Hager M., Tringler B., Georgoulopoulos A., Ciresa­ Koenig A., Volgger B., et al.: ”Diagnostic accuracy of guided cervical biopsies: a prospective multicenter study comparing the histopathology of simultaneous biopsy and cone specimen”. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 203, 321 e1.

[16] Chen L., Liu L., Tao X., Guo L., Zhang H., Sui L.: ”Risk Factor Analysis of Persistent High­Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion After Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure Conization”. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2018, 23, 24.

[17] Baldur­Felskov B., Mwaiselage J., Faber M.T., Kjaerem M., de la Cour C.D., Munk C., et al.: ”Factors associated with a cervical high­grade lesion on cytology or a positive visual inspection with acetic acid among more than 3,300 Tanzanian women”. Trop Med Int Health, 2018, 24, 29.

[18] Qian X.Y., You Z.X., Cao Q.W., Zou B.B., Xing Y.: ”[Analysis of the missed diagnosis of invasive carcinoma under the microscope in HSIL diagnosed by colposcopy­-guided biopsy and related influenc­ing factors]”. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi, 2018, 53, 613.

[19] Stuebs F.A., Schulmeyer C.E., Mehlhorn G., Gass P., Kehl S., Ren­ner S.K., et al.: ”Accuracy of colposcopy-­directed biopsy in detect­ing early cervical neoplasia: a retrospective study”. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2018, 299, 525.

[20] Cheng X., Feng Y., Wang X., Wan X., Xie X., Lu W.: ”The effec­ tiveness of conization treatment for post­menopausal women with high­grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia”. Exp Ther Med, 2013, 5, 185.

[21] Demirkiran F., Kahramanoglu I., Turan H., Yilmaz N., Yurtkal A., Meseci E., et al.: ”See and treat strategy by LEEP conization in patients with abnormal cervical cytology”. Ginekol Pol, 2017, 88, 349.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.

Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.

JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.

Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.

BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.

Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top