Cargando…

Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion

Objectives: To compare the performance and outcomes of monopolar electrosurgical conization (MESC) or the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in the treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Methods: This retrospective study included 554 patients diagnosed with HSIL...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ding, Jun, Xu, Haiou, Xia, Lihua, Cao, Shanshan, Wu, Qing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8489594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34616768
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.721545
_version_ 1784578367281954816
author Ding, Jun
Xu, Haiou
Xia, Lihua
Cao, Shanshan
Wu, Qing
author_facet Ding, Jun
Xu, Haiou
Xia, Lihua
Cao, Shanshan
Wu, Qing
author_sort Ding, Jun
collection PubMed
description Objectives: To compare the performance and outcomes of monopolar electrosurgical conization (MESC) or the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in the treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Methods: This retrospective study included 554 patients diagnosed with HSIL through biopsy. The study used either LEEP or MESC for cervical conization. Additionally, the medical records of these patients, including the basic information, status of the excision margin, cone depth, cone width, fragmentation, complication, and the results of a 6-month follow-up after conization, were reviewed. Results: Compared to MESC, LEEP had a significantly higher rate of positive endocervical margin (3.77 vs. 8.65%; p = 0.018), burn injury of the margin (4.90 vs. 10.38%; p = 0.016) and a lower rate of adequate cone depth (83.40 vs. 89.62%; p = 0.034). In addition, LEEP was significantly more likely to cause fragmentation (p = 0.000). There was, however, no significant difference in the rate of abnormal cervical cytology and positive high-risk HPV (hrHPV) between these two groups, 6 months after cervical conization. Conclusion: Both LEEP and MESC appeared to be equally effective in the clinical treatment of HSIL. Nonetheless, MESC resulted in a better pathological outcome with regard to the status of the margin, tissue fragmentation, and cone depth.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8489594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84895942021-10-05 Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Ding, Jun Xu, Haiou Xia, Lihua Cao, Shanshan Wu, Qing Front Surg Surgery Objectives: To compare the performance and outcomes of monopolar electrosurgical conization (MESC) or the loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) in the treatment of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). Methods: This retrospective study included 554 patients diagnosed with HSIL through biopsy. The study used either LEEP or MESC for cervical conization. Additionally, the medical records of these patients, including the basic information, status of the excision margin, cone depth, cone width, fragmentation, complication, and the results of a 6-month follow-up after conization, were reviewed. Results: Compared to MESC, LEEP had a significantly higher rate of positive endocervical margin (3.77 vs. 8.65%; p = 0.018), burn injury of the margin (4.90 vs. 10.38%; p = 0.016) and a lower rate of adequate cone depth (83.40 vs. 89.62%; p = 0.034). In addition, LEEP was significantly more likely to cause fragmentation (p = 0.000). There was, however, no significant difference in the rate of abnormal cervical cytology and positive high-risk HPV (hrHPV) between these two groups, 6 months after cervical conization. Conclusion: Both LEEP and MESC appeared to be equally effective in the clinical treatment of HSIL. Nonetheless, MESC resulted in a better pathological outcome with regard to the status of the margin, tissue fragmentation, and cone depth. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8489594/ /pubmed/34616768 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.721545 Text en Copyright © 2021 Ding, Xu, Xia, Cao and Wu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Ding, Jun
Xu, Haiou
Xia, Lihua
Cao, Shanshan
Wu, Qing
Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title_full Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title_fullStr Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title_short Comparison of Monopolar Electrosurgical Conization and the Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure in the Management of High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion
title_sort comparison of monopolar electrosurgical conization and the loop electrosurgical excision procedure in the management of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8489594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34616768
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.721545
work_keys_str_mv AT dingjun comparisonofmonopolarelectrosurgicalconizationandtheloopelectrosurgicalexcisionprocedureinthemanagementofhighgradesquamousintraepitheliallesion
AT xuhaiou comparisonofmonopolarelectrosurgicalconizationandtheloopelectrosurgicalexcisionprocedureinthemanagementofhighgradesquamousintraepitheliallesion
AT xialihua comparisonofmonopolarelectrosurgicalconizationandtheloopelectrosurgicalexcisionprocedureinthemanagementofhighgradesquamousintraepitheliallesion
AT caoshanshan comparisonofmonopolarelectrosurgicalconizationandtheloopelectrosurgicalexcisionprocedureinthemanagementofhighgradesquamousintraepitheliallesion
AT wuqing comparisonofmonopolarelectrosurgicalconizationandtheloopelectrosurgicalexcisionprocedureinthemanagementofhighgradesquamousintraepitheliallesion