title: Diagnostic value of conization of the uterine cervix in the management of cervical neoplasia: a review of 756 consecutive patients.
abstract: A review of 584 consecutive cases of conizations performed over a 15-year period showed that 320 patients (54.8%) had conizations because of the presence of neoplastic cells in the endocervical curettings. Of these patients, 268 (83.4%) had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of various grades on conization, and 12 (3.6%) had microinvasive cancer. The remaining 40 patients had normal cervical epithelium. One hundred seven (18.3%) patients had conization because of cytological smear and colposcopy discrepancy. Seventy-six (71.0%) patients in this category had cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Two (2.0%) had superficially invasive cancer; the remaining 29 patients had normal cervical histology. Sixty-seven (11.5%) had conizations because of unsatisfactory colposcopic evaluations. This review indicates that although conization is less frequently performed, it is still a useful tool in the management of patients with abnormal cytology in whom colposcopy evaluation cannot rule out invasive cancer.
authors: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, New York 10027.
authors: S
authors: S
authors: Matseoane
authors: S B
authors: SB
authors: Williams
authors: C
authors: C
authors: Navarro
authors: H
authors: H
authors: Hedriana
authors: T
authors: T
authors: Mushayandebvu
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001706:Biopsy; D002584:Cervix Uteri / Q000473:pathology*; D003127:Colposcopy; D003475:Curettage; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000473:pathology*