2000
DOI: 10.1097/00006250-200006000-00009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Outcomes After Large Loop Excision With Clear Margins

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
32
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
32
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The present study found glandular involvement in 35% of patients who had recurrent CIN and in 4.3% of the nonrecurrent patients (OR 11.8; 95% CI, 3.98-36.30). In the multivariate analysis our results were similar to Paraskevadis et al [22], where glandular involvement was one of the independent risk factors associated with recurrence (HR 3.46; 95% CI: 1.71-7.01).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The present study found glandular involvement in 35% of patients who had recurrent CIN and in 4.3% of the nonrecurrent patients (OR 11.8; 95% CI, 3.98-36.30). In the multivariate analysis our results were similar to Paraskevadis et al [22], where glandular involvement was one of the independent risk factors associated with recurrence (HR 3.46; 95% CI: 1.71-7.01).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Nevertheless, dysplastic cells located deeper in glandular epithelium are protected from this destruction. Later, these dysplastic cells may recur, progress, or invade the surrounding stroma [3,7] Other studies showed that the most important factor related to recurrence was glandular involvement [7,22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results of Kır et al [5] was similar to ours, 25% endocervical glandular involvement in CIN 1 and 91% endocervical glandular involvement in CIN 3. Previously reported studies related endocervical glandular involvement to higher recurrence after LEEP [2,[8][9][10][11][12]. Opposing results were also reported [13,14].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Eighteen mm is the minimal cone length needed to prevent residual CIN III on the apex in multiparous and 15 mm in nulliparous patients. We have to emphasize that shorter cone (10-12 mm) at nulliparous may result in residual CIN III at the cone apex and obligatory reconization which may seriously disrupt the fertile function [24][25][26][27]. Since the cone apex was free from CIN in 116/124 (95%) of patients, we propose the cone length of 15 mm for women who are planning pregnancy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%