Quality Evaluation of Cone Biopsy Specimens Obtained by Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone

Background Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) has been used for the diagnosis and treatment of precancerous cervical lesions, and it is the first choice of treatment in the majority of cervical pathology services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of thermal artifacts, the need for serial sections, the percentage of clear and involved resection margins and the relationship between endocervical gland involvement and the severity of the lesion in samples resected using LLETZ. Methods A retrospective study was performed at Santa Casa de Misericordia School of Science (HSCMV), Vitoria, Espirito Santo, Brazil with a sample of 52 histopathology slides from patients submitted to conization because of abnormal cytology findings and a biopsy result of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2, CIN 3 and adenocarcinoma in situ. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test. Results Serial sections were required to confirm diagnosis in four of 52 cases. Thermal artifacts were present in all cases, with grade I being the most common (94.2% of cases). Clear margins were found in 96.2% of cases. No association was found between glandular involvement and CIN 1 (P > 0.05); however, there was an association with CIN 2 and CIN 3 (P < 0.05). Conclusion The amount of excised tissue was sufficient, thermal artifacts were slight, resection margins were clear in most of cases, and a possible association was found between glandular involvement and the severity of the lesion.

[1]  A. Spathis,et al.  Expression of HPV‐related biomarkers and grade of cervical intraepithelial lesion at treatment , 2014, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[2]  Y. Ding,et al.  Post-treatment human papillomavirus status and recurrence rates in patients treated with loop electrosurgical excision procedure conization for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 2013, European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology.

[3]  F. Ghezzi,et al.  Risk factors for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia recurrence after conization: a 10-year study. , 2012, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[4]  S. Ghaem-Maghami,et al.  Long‐term compliance with follow‐up after treatment for cervical intra‐epithelial neoplasia , 2012, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica.

[5]  P. Soutter,et al.  Histological recurrence and depth of loop treatment of the cervix in women of reproductive age: incomplete excision versus adverse pregnancy outcome , 2011, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[6]  J. Gondry,et al.  [Should CIN 2 and 3 be treated the same way?]. , 2011, Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité.

[7]  C. Kietpeerakool,et al.  Perioperative complications of an outpatient loop electrosurgical excision procedure: a review of 857 consecutive cases. , 2009, Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP.

[8]  V. Melo,et al.  Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia recurrence after conization in HIV‐positive and HIV‐negative women , 2009, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[9]  T. Wright,et al.  2006 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women with Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia or Adenocarcinoma in Situ , 2008 .

[10]  C. Houghton,et al.  Cold knife versus laser cone biopsy for adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix—a comparison of management and outcome , 2007, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[11]  A. Moscicki,et al.  Regression of low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions in young women , 2004, The Lancet.

[12]  L. Hirschowitz,et al.  Predicting residual disease after excision of cervical dysplasia. , 2004, BJOG: an International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

[13]  J. Hocking,et al.  Influences on the risk of recurrent high grade cervical abnormality , 2002, International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer.

[14]  K. Tamussino,et al.  Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia III: Long‐Term Follow‐Up After Cold‐Knife Conization With Involved Margins , 2002, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[15]  S. King,et al.  Margin status and excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a review. , 2000, Obstetrical & gynecological survey.

[16]  A. Ferenczy Management of patients with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions , 1995, Cancer.

[17]  D. Gallup,et al.  Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ): a pathologic evaluation. , 1994, Gynecologic oncology.

[18]  M. Read,et al.  Efficacy and safety of large-loop excision of the transformation zone , 1994, The Lancet.

[19]  H. Wynter,et al.  Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ)--an alternative treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 1993, West Indian medical journal.

[20]  F. Montz,et al.  Large-Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone: Effect on the Pathologic Interpretation of Resection Margins , 1993, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  W. Prendiville,et al.  Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). A new method of management for women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia , 1989, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.