Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2009
Is there any clinical advantage in separating CIN 2 from CIN 3 in the current two-tiered cytological classification?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Boonlikit Sathone, Srisantiroj Nattinee
Аннотация
AIM: To investigate the practical use of description for CIN 2 or CIN 3 in HSIL cytology, the objective of the present study is to compare the prevalence of histologic CIN 2/3 or cancer (CIN 2+) between women with cytologic CIN 2 and CIN 3.
METHODS: The medical records of women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) on cytology who underwent colposcopy at Rajavithi hospital between January 2001 and March 2005 were reviewed.
RESULTS: Of 152 women with HSIL, 70 and 82 had cytologic change compatible with CIN 2 and CIN 3, respectively. Women from HSIL-CIN 3 were significantly more likely to have CIN 2/3 or cancer than those from HSIL-CIN 2. Histology-proved CIN 2+ was confirmed in 64.3% and 85.4% in HSIL-CIN 2 and HSIL-CIN 3, respectively (p<0.05). Invasive cancer was found in 5.7% in HSIL-CIN 2 and 9.8% HSIL-CIN 3.
CONCLUSION: The histologic outcome is obviously different between women with cytologic CIN 2 and CIN 3. However, both groups should be managed similarly because of the high prevalence of high-grade cervical lesion including invasive cancer.
METHODS: The medical records of women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) on cytology who underwent colposcopy at Rajavithi hospital between January 2001 and March 2005 were reviewed.
RESULTS: Of 152 women with HSIL, 70 and 82 had cytologic change compatible with CIN 2 and CIN 3, respectively. Women from HSIL-CIN 3 were significantly more likely to have CIN 2/3 or cancer than those from HSIL-CIN 2. Histology-proved CIN 2+ was confirmed in 64.3% and 85.4% in HSIL-CIN 2 and HSIL-CIN 3, respectively (p<0.05). Invasive cancer was found in 5.7% in HSIL-CIN 2 and 9.8% HSIL-CIN 3.
CONCLUSION: The histologic outcome is obviously different between women with cytologic CIN 2 and CIN 3. However, both groups should be managed similarly because of the high prevalence of high-grade cervical lesion including invasive cancer.