Cargando…

Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers

AIM: To compare thermocoagulation and cryotherapy for treatment of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). METHODS: From May 2017 to May 2018, women with CIN2/3 were randomized to thermocoagulation or cryotherapy at Peking University Shenzhen Hospital. Follow‐up at 4 and 8 months includ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Duan, Lyufang, Du, Hui, Belinson, Jerome L., Liu, Zhihong, Xiao, Aimin, Liu, Shuangyan, Zhao, Liwei, Wang, Chun, Qu, Xinfeng, Wu, Ruifang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7820992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33089619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14520
_version_ 1783639328536133632
author Duan, Lyufang
Du, Hui
Belinson, Jerome L.
Liu, Zhihong
Xiao, Aimin
Liu, Shuangyan
Zhao, Liwei
Wang, Chun
Qu, Xinfeng
Wu, Ruifang
author_facet Duan, Lyufang
Du, Hui
Belinson, Jerome L.
Liu, Zhihong
Xiao, Aimin
Liu, Shuangyan
Zhao, Liwei
Wang, Chun
Qu, Xinfeng
Wu, Ruifang
author_sort Duan, Lyufang
collection PubMed
description AIM: To compare thermocoagulation and cryotherapy for treatment of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). METHODS: From May 2017 to May 2018, women with CIN2/3 were randomized to thermocoagulation or cryotherapy at Peking University Shenzhen Hospital. Follow‐up at 4 and 8 months included cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Women who were HPV‐positive or had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher‐grade disease underwent colposcopy/biopsy. RESULTS: Among 149 women enrolled, 74 were randomized to thermocoagulation, and 75 to cryotherapy (excluded four were immediately referred for thermocoagulation due to large lesions). At follow‐up, there was no difference between the thermocoagulation and cryotherapy groups in HPV‐negative (4/8 months: 72.5%/86.2% vs 68.6%/80.6%) and pathology‐negative (97.1%/98.5% vs 94.3%/92.3%) rates (all P > 0.05). The cytology‐negative rate was similar for thermocoagulation and cryotherapy at 4 months (79.7% vs 78.9%, P > 0.05), but higher for thermocoagulation at 8 months (100% vs 88.7%, P < 0.05). No lesions were observed among the four referral women at follow‐up. As compared with cryotherapy, thermocoagulation was associated with shorter duration of treatment and less vaginal discharge, but higher pain during application and longer bleeding after treatment. CONCLUSION: Thermocoagulation was as effective and safe as cryotherapy and might be easily applied to treat high‐grade cervical lesions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7820992
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78209922021-01-26 Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers Duan, Lyufang Du, Hui Belinson, Jerome L. Liu, Zhihong Xiao, Aimin Liu, Shuangyan Zhao, Liwei Wang, Chun Qu, Xinfeng Wu, Ruifang J Obstet Gynaecol Res Original Articles AIM: To compare thermocoagulation and cryotherapy for treatment of high‐grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). METHODS: From May 2017 to May 2018, women with CIN2/3 were randomized to thermocoagulation or cryotherapy at Peking University Shenzhen Hospital. Follow‐up at 4 and 8 months included cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Women who were HPV‐positive or had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or higher‐grade disease underwent colposcopy/biopsy. RESULTS: Among 149 women enrolled, 74 were randomized to thermocoagulation, and 75 to cryotherapy (excluded four were immediately referred for thermocoagulation due to large lesions). At follow‐up, there was no difference between the thermocoagulation and cryotherapy groups in HPV‐negative (4/8 months: 72.5%/86.2% vs 68.6%/80.6%) and pathology‐negative (97.1%/98.5% vs 94.3%/92.3%) rates (all P > 0.05). The cytology‐negative rate was similar for thermocoagulation and cryotherapy at 4 months (79.7% vs 78.9%, P > 0.05), but higher for thermocoagulation at 8 months (100% vs 88.7%, P < 0.05). No lesions were observed among the four referral women at follow‐up. As compared with cryotherapy, thermocoagulation was associated with shorter duration of treatment and less vaginal discharge, but higher pain during application and longer bleeding after treatment. CONCLUSION: Thermocoagulation was as effective and safe as cryotherapy and might be easily applied to treat high‐grade cervical lesions. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2020-10-21 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7820992/ /pubmed/33089619 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14520 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Duan, Lyufang
Du, Hui
Belinson, Jerome L.
Liu, Zhihong
Xiao, Aimin
Liu, Shuangyan
Zhao, Liwei
Wang, Chun
Qu, Xinfeng
Wu, Ruifang
Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title_full Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title_fullStr Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title_full_unstemmed Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title_short Thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
title_sort thermocoagulation versus cryotherapy for the treatment of cervical precancers
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7820992/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33089619
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jog.14520
work_keys_str_mv AT duanlyufang thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT duhui thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT belinsonjeromel thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT liuzhihong thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT xiaoaimin thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT liushuangyan thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT zhaoliwei thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT wangchun thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT quxinfeng thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers
AT wuruifang thermocoagulationversuscryotherapyforthetreatmentofcervicalprecancers