正锥缘-大环切除转化区技术的缺点?

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Dražan Butorac, Bernarda Škrtić, Iva Pitner, Krunoslav Kuna, Ivka Djaković
{"title":"正锥缘-大环切除转化区技术的缺点?","authors":"Dražan Butorac, Bernarda Škrtić, Iva Pitner, Krunoslav Kuna, Ivka Djaković","doi":"10.20471/acc.2024.63.02.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim was to compare the efficiency of large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) and cold-knife conization according to the incidence of positive cone margins in histopathologic analysis of the cervical cone. In the study, data obtained from 568 female patients with cone biopsy due to cervical changes during a four-year period (2012-2015) were retrospectively analyzed. Group 1 included patients who were operated on using LLETZ technique and group 2 consisted of patients with cold-knife cone biopsy. LLETZ was a method of choice in 334 (59%) patients, whereas 234 (41%) patients underwent cold-knife cone biopsy. The percentage of positive cone margins was much higher with LLETZ technique, even 39% (131 patients), as compared to 20% with cold-knife cone biopsy. In conclusion, the technique and cone configuration should be individualized, depending on the specifics of the lesion. The transformation zone is not always removed during one LLETZ procedure. High percentage of positive cone margins is not a disadvantage of LLETZ technique because of differences in indications, approach and multiple cutting. The real success of conization can be measured only by the relapse frequency over a long period of time with a high number of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":7072,"journal":{"name":"Acta clinica Croatica","volume":"63 2","pages":"300-305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11912862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"POSITIVE CONE MARGINS - A DISADVANTAGE OF THE LARGE LOOP EXCISION OF TRANSFORMATION ZONE TECHNIQUE?\",\"authors\":\"Dražan Butorac, Bernarda Škrtić, Iva Pitner, Krunoslav Kuna, Ivka Djaković\",\"doi\":\"10.20471/acc.2024.63.02.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim was to compare the efficiency of large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) and cold-knife conization according to the incidence of positive cone margins in histopathologic analysis of the cervical cone. In the study, data obtained from 568 female patients with cone biopsy due to cervical changes during a four-year period (2012-2015) were retrospectively analyzed. Group 1 included patients who were operated on using LLETZ technique and group 2 consisted of patients with cold-knife cone biopsy. LLETZ was a method of choice in 334 (59%) patients, whereas 234 (41%) patients underwent cold-knife cone biopsy. The percentage of positive cone margins was much higher with LLETZ technique, even 39% (131 patients), as compared to 20% with cold-knife cone biopsy. In conclusion, the technique and cone configuration should be individualized, depending on the specifics of the lesion. The transformation zone is not always removed during one LLETZ procedure. High percentage of positive cone margins is not a disadvantage of LLETZ technique because of differences in indications, approach and multiple cutting. The real success of conization can be measured only by the relapse frequency over a long period of time with a high number of patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta clinica Croatica\",\"volume\":\"63 2\",\"pages\":\"300-305\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11912862/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta clinica Croatica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2024.63.02.5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta clinica Croatica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2024.63.02.5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的是比较大环切除转化区(LLETZ)和冷刀锥切术的效率,根据锥体阳性边缘的发生率在宫颈锥体的组织病理学分析。在这项研究中,回顾性分析了568名女性患者在4年(2012-2015年)期间因宫颈变化而行椎体活检的数据。第一组采用LLETZ技术,第二组采用冷刀锥活检。334例(59%)患者选择LLETZ,而234例(41%)患者选择冷刀锥活检。LLETZ技术的锥体边缘阳性百分率要高得多,甚至达到39%(131例),而冷刀锥体活检的百分率为20%。总之,技术和锥体结构应根据病变的具体情况进行个体化。在一个LLETZ过程中,转换区域并不总是被移除。由于适应症、入路和多次切割的不同,高阳性锥体边缘百分比并不是LLETZ技术的缺点。只有在长时间、高数量的患者中,以复发率来衡量根治是否真正成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
POSITIVE CONE MARGINS - A DISADVANTAGE OF THE LARGE LOOP EXCISION OF TRANSFORMATION ZONE TECHNIQUE?

The aim was to compare the efficiency of large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) and cold-knife conization according to the incidence of positive cone margins in histopathologic analysis of the cervical cone. In the study, data obtained from 568 female patients with cone biopsy due to cervical changes during a four-year period (2012-2015) were retrospectively analyzed. Group 1 included patients who were operated on using LLETZ technique and group 2 consisted of patients with cold-knife cone biopsy. LLETZ was a method of choice in 334 (59%) patients, whereas 234 (41%) patients underwent cold-knife cone biopsy. The percentage of positive cone margins was much higher with LLETZ technique, even 39% (131 patients), as compared to 20% with cold-knife cone biopsy. In conclusion, the technique and cone configuration should be individualized, depending on the specifics of the lesion. The transformation zone is not always removed during one LLETZ procedure. High percentage of positive cone margins is not a disadvantage of LLETZ technique because of differences in indications, approach and multiple cutting. The real success of conization can be measured only by the relapse frequency over a long period of time with a high number of patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta clinica Croatica
Acta clinica Croatica 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
38
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Clinica Croatica is a peer reviewed general medical journal that publishes original articles that advance and improve medical science and practice and that serve the purpose of transfer of original and valuable information to journal readers. Acta Clinica Croatica is published in English four times a year.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信