Factors associated with positive margins in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and postconization management

[1]  A. Usubutun,et al.  Repeat LEEP conization in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 and positive ectocervical margins , 2009, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[2]  William P Soutter,et al.  Incomplete excision of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and risk of treatment failure: a meta-analysis. , 2007, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  Diane Solomon,et al.  2006 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ. , 2007, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[4]  Diane Solomon,et al.  2006 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women With Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia or Adenocarcinoma In Situ , 2007, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[5]  A. Tehranian,et al.  The value of frozen sectioning for the evaluation of resection margins in cases of conization , 2007, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[6]  M. Cruickshank,et al.  Precancerous changes in the cervix and risk of subsequent preterm birth , 2007, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[7]  L. Hazlett,et al.  Significance of margin and extent of dysplasia in loop electrosurgery excision procedure biopsies performed for high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in predicting persistent disease. , 2007, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[8]  P. Sasieni,et al.  Long‐term risk of invasive cervical cancer after treatment of squamous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia , 2006, International journal of cancer.

[9]  M Arbyn,et al.  Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2006, The Lancet.

[10]  E. Pukkala,et al.  Risk of cervical and other cancers after treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: retrospective cohort study , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  J. Bentley,et al.  The Effect of Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure on Future Pregnancy Outcome , 2005, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  M. Gu,et al.  Efficacy of cone biopsy of the uterine cervix during frozen section for the evaluation of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3. , 2004, American journal of clinical pathology.

[13]  H. Ngan,et al.  FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. , 2000, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[14]  J. Daurès,et al.  Randomized study comparing two techniques of conization: cold knife versus loop excision. , 1999, Gynecologic oncology.

[15]  L. W. Huang,et al.  A comparison between loop electrosurgical excision procedure and cold knife conization for treatment of cervical dysplasia: residual disease in a subsequent hysterectomy specimen. , 1999, Gynecologic oncology.

[16]  J. Daling,et al.  Effect of cervical carcinoma in situ and its management on pregnancy outcome. , 1999, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[17]  J. Murdoch,et al.  Histological incomplete excision of CIN after large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) merits careful follow up, not retreatment , 1992, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.