The role of colposcopy in the follow up of women treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

被引:13
作者
Soutter, WP
Butler, JSB
Tipples, M
机构
[1] Univ London Imperial Coll Sci & Technol, Fac Med, Dept Gynecol Oncol, London, England
[2] Queen Charlottes & Chelsea Hosp Women, Gynaecol Oncol Ctr, London, England
关键词
CIN; colposcopy; cytology; recurrence; sensitivity;
D O I
10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00915.x
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective To determine the effect of colposcopy on the sensitivity and specificity of follow-up procedures in the detection of residual or recurrent disease after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). Design A retrospective study of information held in a colposcopy database. Setting A teaching hospital colposcopy clinic. Population A total of 2244 women treated in Hammersmith Hospital for histologically confirmed CIN between 1 January 1988 and 31 December 2002. Methods Data from the records of women treated with some form of local conservative therapy for CIN1-CIN3 between January 1988 and December 2002 were extracted from the colposcopy database. Women with histological confirmation of post-treatment disease were identified. Main outcome measures The sensitivity and specificity of cytology alone was compared with the sensitivity and specificity of the combination of colposcopy and cytology. Results Colposcopy improved the sensitivity of cytology for the detection of high-grade disease from 64 to 91% but reduced the specificity from 95 to 88%. With a 3% rate of post-treatment high-grade disease, colposcopy detected 8 extra cases per 1000 women but resulted in 88 more false alarms per 1000 women. Among women in whom the treatment margins were involved or uncertain, colposcopy detected 13 extra cases per 1000 women but resulted in 12 fewer false alarms per 1000 women because the prevalence of post-treatment disease was higher. Conclusions Colposcopy does improve the detection rate of post-treatment disease but at a cost of additional false alarms. The benefit of colposcopy will be greater in high-risk groups of women with higher rates of treatment failure.
引用
收藏
页码:511 / 514
页数:4
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
ARENA B, 1991, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (Abingdon), V11, P290, DOI 10.3109/01443619109027825
[2]   Cytology and colposcopy after loop electrosurgical excision: Implications for follow-up [J].
Baldauf, JJ ;
Dreyfus, M ;
Ritter, J ;
Cuenin, C ;
Tissier, I ;
Meyer, P .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 92 (01) :124-130
[3]   MANAGEMENT OF WOMEN MILD AND MODERATE CERVICAL DYSKARYOSIS [J].
FLANNELLY, G ;
ANDERSON, D ;
KITCHENER, HC ;
MANN, EMF ;
CAMPBELL, M ;
FISHER, P ;
WALKER, F ;
TEMPLETON, AA .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1994, 308 (6941) :1399-1403
[4]   A study of treatment failures following large loop excision of the transformation zone for the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia [J].
Flannelly, G ;
Langhan, H ;
Jandial, L ;
Mann, E ;
Campbell, M ;
Kitchener, H .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1997, 104 (06) :718-722
[5]   Persistent intraepithelial neoplasia after excision for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III [J].
Gardeil, F ;
BarryWalsh, C ;
Prendiville, W ;
Clinch, J ;
Turner, MJ .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 89 (03) :419-422
[6]  
GILES J, 1989, J OBSTET GYNAECOL, V10, P78
[7]   OBSERVER VARIATION IN HISTOPATHOLOGICAL DIAGNOSIS AND GRADING OF CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA [J].
ISMAIL, SM ;
COLCLOUGH, AB ;
DINNEN, JS ;
EAKINS, D ;
EVANS, DMD ;
GRADWELL, E ;
OSULLIVAN, JP ;
SUMMERELL, JM ;
NEWCOMBE, RG .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1989, 298 (6675) :707-710
[8]   IS ROUTINE COLPOSCOPIC ASSESSMENT NECESSARY FOLLOWING LASER ABLATION OF CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA [J].
LOPES, A ;
MORYOSEF, S ;
PEARSON, S ;
IRELAND, D ;
MONAGHAN, JM .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1990, 97 (02) :175-177
[9]  
LUESLEY D, 2004, PUBLICATION NHSCSP, V20
[10]   THE VALUE OF CYTOLOGY AND COLPOSCOPY IN THE FOLLOW-UP OF CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA AFTER TREATMENT BY LASER EXCISION [J].
MAHADEVAN, N ;
HORWELL, DH .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1993, 100 (06) :563-566