European journal of gynaecological oncology · 2008
Cold-knife conization versus the loop electrosurgical excision procedure for treatment of cervical dysplasia.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Bozanović T, Ljubic A, Momcilov P, Milicevic S, Mostić T, Atanacković J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Classical conization is a standard procedure for treatment of cervical lesions. Conization with loop diathermy is well established and lesions can be excised in more than 90% of cases.
OBJECTIVE: To compare two methods of conization for the treatment of cervical dysplasia.
METHOD: The study included 172 patients who had conization for diagnosed cervical dysplasia. A retrospective analysis was conducted on incidence of complications and presence of dysplasia on the specimen edges after classical conization compared to conization with loop diathermy. The possibilities for analyzing specimen edges were reviewed.
RESULTS: A significantly higher incidence of complications was found among patients who underwent classical conization compared to those who had the loop diathermy procedure. The loop procedure is sufficient for treatment of cervical dysplasias.
CONCLUSION: The authors suggest loop diathermy conization as the method of choice for treatment of cervical dysplasia.
OBJECTIVE: To compare two methods of conization for the treatment of cervical dysplasia.
METHOD: The study included 172 patients who had conization for diagnosed cervical dysplasia. A retrospective analysis was conducted on incidence of complications and presence of dysplasia on the specimen edges after classical conization compared to conization with loop diathermy. The possibilities for analyzing specimen edges were reviewed.
RESULTS: A significantly higher incidence of complications was found among patients who underwent classical conization compared to those who had the loop diathermy procedure. The loop procedure is sufficient for treatment of cervical dysplasias.
CONCLUSION: The authors suggest loop diathermy conization as the method of choice for treatment of cervical dysplasia.