Open AccessThe efficacy of conservative management after conization in patients with stage IA1 microinvasive cervical carcinoma
Author(s) -
LEE SHIN WHA,
KIM YONGMAN,
SON WOOSEOK,
YOU HANGJO,
KIM DAEYEON,
KIM JONGHYEOK,
KIM YOUNGTAK,
NAM JOOHYUN
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
acta obstetricia et gynecologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.401
H-Index - 102
eISSN - 1600-0412
pISSN - 0001-6349
DOI - 10.1080/00016340802596009
Subject(s) - medicine , stage (stratigraphy) , cervix , cervical conization , carcinoma in situ , cervical intraepithelial neoplasia , hysterectomy , conservative management , surgery , carcinoma , colposcopy , gynecology , cervical cancer , cancer , paleontology , biology
Objective. To investigate the efficacy of conization followed by conservative management for treating stage IA1 microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Design/Setting. Retrospective study. Population. Seventy‐five patients treated for stage IA1 microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Patients underwent conization followed by hysterectomy (Group 1, 53 patients), or were followed by conservative management (Group 2, 22 patients). Methods. Medical and histopathological record review. Results. For Group 1, pathology results showed that 30 had no residual tumor, one had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) I, 11 had CIN III/cervical carcinoma in situ (CIS), nine had microinvasive carcinomas, and one had an invasive carcinoma (outcome for one patient not recorded). For Group 2, secondary procedures involved only cervical smears for 12 (48%) patients, of whom nine had normal cytology, one had low‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and two had high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. For 13 (52%) patients in Group 2, secondary procedures involved repeat conization on whom six had no residual tumor, one had CIN II, four CIN III/CIS, and two microinvasive carcinoma and a negative resection margin. Therefore, conization followed by conservative management was an effective treatment for 90.9% (20/22) of Group 2. In neither group was recurrence recorded. There was no relation between lymphovascular invasion and follow‐up cytology or pathology results, or between resection margin status and follow‐up examination results. Conclusion. Conization alone with careful follow‐up appears to be an effective and safe treatment for patients with stage IA1 microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix, regardless of resection margins status or lymphovascular invasion.