The concordance between colposcopic biopsy
and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in
patients with known smear cytology and human
papillomavirus results

Kanbay ozturk, Sumeyye; Yücesoy, İzzet; balcı, sibel; gezer, şener

doi:10.14744/nci.2021.80090

The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results

Şener GEZER, (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey)

Sumeyye Kanbay ÖZTÜRK, (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey)

Sibel BALCI, (Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey)

İzzet YÜCESOY (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kocaeli University Faculty of Medicine, Kocaeli, Turkey)

İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri

0 0

Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 8 Sayı: 6 Sayfa Aralığı: 588 - 594 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.14744/nci.2021.80090 İndeks Tarihi: 28-05-2022

The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results

Öz:

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) methods to diagnose cervical pre-invasive lesions and cervical cancer, and to calculate the low and high prediction rates of lesions for both methods. METHODS: A total of 241 patients who underwent LEEP after colposcopic biopsy for different indications and also known cervical cytology and human papillomavirus test results were included in the study. Clinical variables such as age, gravida, parity, menopausal status, smoking, endocervical curettage results, and surgical margins were recorded. RESULTS: The total concordance between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP was 41.9%. The rates of finding a more serious lesion than in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (underestimation) for negative, Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN) 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3 were calculated as 100%, 12.8%, 14.8%, and 3.9%, respectively. Rates of finding a less serious lesion than detected in colposcopic biopsy with LEEP (overestimation) for CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3, cervical carcinoma were calculated as 56.4%, 33.3%, 3.9%, and 0%, respectively. Underestimation was seen in a total of 28 patients, and overestimation was present in 113 patients. Parity was found to be the only associated factor that affected the final diagnosis for high-grade lesions in univariate logistic regression analysis (odds ratio=1.234, 95% confidence interval: 1.005–1.514). CONCLUSION: Discrepancies between colposcopically directed punch biopsy and subsequent histopathologic LEEP findings are common. New methods to reduce the inconsistency between colposcopic biopsy and LEEP are necessary to prevent patients from being under or over treated.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, Killackey M, Kulasingam SL, Cain JM, et al. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2012;16:175–204.
2. TC Sağlık Bakanlığı. Türkiye Halk Sağlığı Kurumu, Türkiye Kanser İstatistikleri. Ankara, 2017. Available at: https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/ depo/birimler/kanser-db/istatistik/2014-RAPOR._uzuuun.pdf. Accessed Mar 27, 2020.
3. Khan MJ, Werner CL, Darragh TM, Guido RS, Mathews C, Moscicki AB, et al. ASCCP Colposcopy Standards: Role of Colposcopy, Benefits, Potential Harms, and Terminology for Colposcopic Practice. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2017;21:223–9.
4. Martin-Hirsch PP, Paraskevaidis E, Bryant A, Dickinson HO. Surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD001318.
5. Barker B, Garcia FA, Warner J, Lozerski J, Hatch K. Baseline inaccuracy rates for the comparison of cervical biopsy to loop electrosurgical excision histopathologic diagnoses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:349– 52.
6. Byrom J, Douce G, Jones PW, Tucker H, Millinship J, Dhar K, et al. Should punch biopsies be used when high-grade disease is suspected at initial colposcopic assessment? A prospective study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16:253–6.
7. Zuchna C, Hager M, Tringler B, Georgoulopoulos A, Ciresa-Koenig A, Volgger B, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of guided cervical biopsies: a prospective multicenter study comparing the histopathology of simultaneous biopsy and cone specimen. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:321. e1–6.
8. Moss EL, Hadden P, Douce G, Jones PW, Arbyn M, Redman CW. Is the colposcopically directed punch biopsy a reliable diagnostic test in women with minor cytological lesions? J Low Genit Tract Dis 2012;16:421–6.
9. Stoler MH, Vichnin MD, Ferenczy A, Ferris DG, Perez G, Paavonen J, et al; FUTURE I, II and III Investigators. The accuracy of colposcopic biopsy: analyses from the placebo arm of the Gardasil clinical trials. Int J Cancer 2011;128:1354–62.
10. Jung Y, Lee AR, Lee SJ, Lee YS, Park DC, Park EK. Clinical factors that affect diagnostic discrepancy between colposcopically directed biopsies and loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization of the uterine cervix. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2018;61:477–88.
11. Duesing N, Schwarz J, Choschzick M, Jaenicke F, Gieseking F, Issa R, et al. Assessment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) with colposcopic biopsy and efficacy of loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP). Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;286:1549–54.
12. Boonlikit S, Asavapiriyanont S, Junghuttakarnsatit P, Tuipae S, Supakarapongkul W. Correlation between colposcopically directed biopsy and large loop excision of the transformation zone and influence of age on the outcome. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:299–305.
13. Gullotta G, Margariti PA, Rabitti C, Balsamo G, Valle D, Capelli A, et al. Cytology, histology, and colposcopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic non-invasive epithelial lesions of the cervix. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1997;18:36–8.
14. Arbyn M, Bergeron C, Klinkhamer P, Martin-Hirsch P, Siebers AG, Bulten J. Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:167–77.
15. Kabaca C, Koleli I, Sariibrahim B, Karateke A, Gurbuz A, Kapudere B, et al. Is cervical punch biopsy enough for the management of low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia? J Low Genit Tract Dis 2014;18:240–5.
16. Kahramanoglu I, Demirkiran F, Turan H, Bese T, Yilmaz N, Ilvan S, et al. The use of colposcopic punch biopsy in the management of abnormal cervical cytology: a 5-year retrospective audit. J Obstet Gynaecol 2019;39:110–4.
17. Rodriguez-Manfredi A, Alonso I, del Pino M, Fusté P, Torné A, et al. Predictors of absence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the conization specimen. Gynecol Oncol 2013;128:271–6.
18. Ryu A, Nam K, Chung S, Kim J, Lee H, Koh E, et al. Absence of dysplasia in the excised cervix by a loop electrosurgical excision procedure in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Gynecol Oncol 2010;21:87–92.
19. Witt BL, Factor RE, Jarboe EA, Layfield LJ. Negative loop electrosurgical cone biopsy finding following a biopsy diagnosis of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion: frequency and clinical significance. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2012;136:1259–61.
20. Noothong S, Inthasorn P, Warnnissorn M. Pathological discrepancy between colposcopic directed cervical biopsy and Loop Electrosurgical-Excision Procedures (LEEPs) in patients with biopsies proven high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2017;56:628–31.
21. Giannella L, Mfuta K, Gardini G, Rubino T, Fodero C, Prandi S. Highgrade CIN on cervical biopsy and predictors of the subsequent cone histology results in women undergoing immediate conization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015;186:68–74.
22. Zhang L, Li Q, Zhao M, Jia L, Zhang Y. Discrepancies between biopsy-based and excision-based grading of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: the important role of time between excision and biopsy. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2015;34:221–7.
23. Nam K, Ryu A, Jeon S, Kim J, Kwak J, Park B. Clinical significance of a negative loop electrosurgical excision procedure biopsy in patients with biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2015;19:103–9.
24. Carrigg A, Teschendorf C, Amaro D, Weidner N, Tipps A, Shabaik A, et al. Examination of sources of diagnostic error leading to cervical cone biopsies with no evidence of dysplasia. Am J Clin Pathol 2013;139:422–7.
25. Li ZG, Qian de Y, Cen JM, Chen GD, Shu YH. Three-step versus “see-and-treat” approach in women with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in a low-resource country. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;106:202–5.
26. Ostör AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993;12:186–92.
27. Cruickshank ME, Cotton SC, Sharp L, Smart L, Walker LG, Little J; TOMBOLA Group. Management of women with low grade cytology: how reassuring is a normal colposcopy examination? BJOG 2015;122:380–6.
28. Munmany M, Torné A, Nonell R, Barnadas E, Luqui N, Ordi J, et al. Colposcopy evaluation at the time of loop electrosurgical excision procedure may avoid unnecessary treatment. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2018;22:367–74.
29. Carcopino X, Mancini J, Charpin C, Grisot C, Maycock JA, Houvenaeghel G, et al. Direct colposcopic vision used with the LLETZ procedure for optimal treatment of CIN: results of joint cohort studies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013;288:1087-94.
30. Pretorius RG, Belinson JL, Azizi F, Peterson PC, Belinson S. Utility of random cervical biopsy and endocervical curettage in a low-risk population. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2012;16:333–8.
31. Wright TC Jr, Stoler MH, Behrens CM, Apple R, Derion T, Wright TL. The ATHENA human papillomavirus study: design, methods, and baseline results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:46.e1.
32. Du R, Meng W, Chen ZF, Zhang Y, Chen SY, Ding Y. Post-treatment human papillomavirus status and recurrence rates in patients treated with loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2013;34:548–51.
33. de Sam Lazaro S, Newbill CP, Berlin M, Morgan TK. p16 staining of cervical biopsies may decrease the frequency of unnecessary loop electrosurgical excision procedures. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2016;20:201–6.
34. Poomtavorn Y, Tanprasertkul C, Sammor A, Suwannarurk K, Thaweekul Y. Predictors of absent high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in loop electrosurgical excision procedure specimens of patients with colposcopic directed biopsy-confirmed high-grade CIN. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2019;20:849–54.
35. Lehtovirta P, Paavonen J, Heikinheimo O. Risk factors, diagnosis and prognosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among HIV-infected women. Int J STD AIDS 2008;19:37–41.
36. Cecchini S, Visioli CB, Zappa M, Ciatto S. Recurrence after treatment by loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP) of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Tumori 2002;88:478–80.
37. Livasy CA, Moore DT, Van Le L. The clinical significance of a negative loop electrosurgical cone biopsy for high-grade dysplasia. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:250–4.

APA	gezer ş, Kanbay ozturk S, balcı s, Yücesoy İ (2021). The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. , 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
Chicago	gezer şener,Kanbay ozturk Sumeyye,balcı sibel,Yücesoy İzzet The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. (2021): 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
MLA	gezer şener,Kanbay ozturk Sumeyye,balcı sibel,Yücesoy İzzet The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. , 2021, ss.588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
AMA	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. . 2021; 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
Vancouver	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. . 2021; 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
IEEE	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ "The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results." , ss.588 - 594, 2021. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
ISNAD	gezer, şener vd. "The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results". (2021), 588-594. https://doi.org/10.14744/nci.2021.80090

APA	gezer ş, Kanbay ozturk S, balcı s, Yücesoy İ (2021). The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri, 8(6), 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
Chicago	gezer şener,Kanbay ozturk Sumeyye,balcı sibel,Yücesoy İzzet The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri 8, no.6 (2021): 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
MLA	gezer şener,Kanbay ozturk Sumeyye,balcı sibel,Yücesoy İzzet The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri, vol.8, no.6, 2021, ss.588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
AMA	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri. 2021; 8(6): 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
Vancouver	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results. İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri. 2021; 8(6): 588 - 594. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
IEEE	gezer ş,Kanbay ozturk S,balcı s,Yücesoy İ "The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results." İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri, 8, ss.588 - 594, 2021. 10.14744/nci.2021.80090
ISNAD	gezer, şener vd. "The concordance between colposcopic biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedures in patients with known smear cytology and human papillomavirus results". İstanbul Kuzey Klinikleri 8/6 (2021), 588-594. https://doi.org/10.14744/nci.2021.80090