OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors potentially involved in the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) recurrence after cervical conization in a long-term follow-up period. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive patients with histologically proven CIN who had undergone either cold knife conization or a loop electrosurgical excision procedure were enrolled and scheduled for serial follow-up examinations over a 10-year period. Data were stored in a digital database. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors for recurrence. RESULTS: Between January 1999 and December 2009, 282 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the final statistical analysis. After a median follow-up of 26.7months (range 6-100), 64 (22.7%) women developed histologically confirmed recurrence. The 2-year recurrence-free survival was 83.7% and 66.7% for women with negative and positive margins, respectively (p=0.008). The 5-year recurrence-free survival was 75.4% and 50.3% for patients with negative and positive margins, respectively (p=0.0004). Positive surgical margin was the most important independent predictor of recurrence [HR 2.5 (95%CI 1.5-4.5), p=0.0007; Wald 11.338]. After multinomial logistic regression the indication for conization based on persistent CIN1 was the only independent predictor for negative margin [OR 0.3 (95%CI 0.1-0.7), p=0.008]. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that the surgical margin status represents the most important predictor for CIN recurrence after conization. After excisional therapy, close follow-up is mandatory for the early detection of recurrent disease. The identification of risk factors for recurrence may guide clinical decision-making on expectant management versus re-intervention

Risk factors for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia recurrence after conization: a 10-year study

SERATI, MAURIZIO;RIVA, CRISTINA;CROMI, ANTONELLA;GHEZZI, FABIO
2012-01-01

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors potentially involved in the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) recurrence after cervical conization in a long-term follow-up period. STUDY DESIGN: Consecutive patients with histologically proven CIN who had undergone either cold knife conization or a loop electrosurgical excision procedure were enrolled and scheduled for serial follow-up examinations over a 10-year period. Data were stored in a digital database. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors for recurrence. RESULTS: Between January 1999 and December 2009, 282 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the final statistical analysis. After a median follow-up of 26.7months (range 6-100), 64 (22.7%) women developed histologically confirmed recurrence. The 2-year recurrence-free survival was 83.7% and 66.7% for women with negative and positive margins, respectively (p=0.008). The 5-year recurrence-free survival was 75.4% and 50.3% for patients with negative and positive margins, respectively (p=0.0004). Positive surgical margin was the most important independent predictor of recurrence [HR 2.5 (95%CI 1.5-4.5), p=0.0007; Wald 11.338]. After multinomial logistic regression the indication for conization based on persistent CIN1 was the only independent predictor for negative margin [OR 0.3 (95%CI 0.1-0.7), p=0.008]. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that the surgical margin status represents the most important predictor for CIN recurrence after conization. After excisional therapy, close follow-up is mandatory for the early detection of recurrent disease. The identification of risk factors for recurrence may guide clinical decision-making on expectant management versus re-intervention
2012
Serati, Maurizio; Siesto, G; Carollo, S; Formenti, G; Riva, Cristina; Cromi, Antonella; Ghezzi, Fabio
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11383/1760429
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 26
  • Scopus 66
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 56
social impact