Clinical relevance of objectifying colposcopy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical value of four objective colposcopic criteria inner border, ridge sign, cuffed crypt openings and rag sign to diagnose cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+), using video exoscopy and to compare it to subjective graduating signs. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of video recordings of 444 patients, referred for diagnostic colposcopy, who underwent cervical biopsies, and if indicated loop excisions. Most severe histological diagnosis was recorded. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios (LR) with 95% confidence interval, for CIN 2+ were calculated. RESULTS: Single biopsy, two biopsies and magnification-guided loop excision were performed in 60.8, 39.2 and 70.5% of patients, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV to detect CIN 2+ were 19.3, 99.2, 98.3 and 35.8%, for inner border sign; 53.1, 93.5, 94.7 and 47.6%, for ridge sign; 51.5, 84.9, 88.2, and 44.3%, for cuffed crypt openings, and 40.7, 96.4, 96.1 and 42.5%, for rag sign, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio (LR+) was 26.7 and the negative likelihood ratio (LR-) was 0.81, for inner border sign; 8.2 and 0.5, for ridge sign; 3.41 and 0.57 for cuffed crypt openings; and 11.3 and 0.62 for rag sign, respectively. 90% of CIN 2+ had at least one objective sign. Combination of any two objective signs significantly increased the LR of the presence of CIN 2+, and was clinically superior to any combination of graduating signs. CONCLUSION: Objective colposcopic criteria are clinically useful and significantly associated with CIN 2+.

Laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy in 32 pregnant patients with cervical cancer: rationale, description of the technique, and outcome.

OBJECTIVE: Individualized treatment of pregnant patients with cervical cancer is mandatory; hence, information on nodal status is pivotal to allow a waiting strategy in early-stage disease.We aimed to verify the oncological safety and surgical reproducibility of a standardized laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy in pregnant patients with cervical cancer. METHODS: We standardized laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy during the first and second term of gestation in 32 patients with cervical cancer since 1999. According to gestational week (GW) of less than 16 GWs or more than 16 GWs, 2 different techniques were used. RESULTS: The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages were IA in 10 patients, IB1 in 17 patients, IB2 in 4 patients, and IIA in 1 patient. Mean (SD) GW was 17.5 (5.1) weeks. Mean (SD) operative time was 105.4 (29) minutes. Mean (SD) blood loss was 5.3 (10.2) mL. There were no conversion to laparotomy and no intraoperative complications. A median number of 14 pelvic lymph nodes (range, 8-57) were harvested. Median hospital stay was 6 days. Median follow-up is 42.5 months (range, 17-164). Four patients had lymph node metastases. Five patients interrupted their pregnancy. Fourteen patients were given neoadjuvant platin-based systemic therapy. All patients are alive and disease free. All children born through cesarean delivery at a mean (SD) 34 (1.9) GWs are well and show normal clinical neurological development. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest series so far reported on laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy during pregnancy. This procedure is safe and associated with good oncological and obstetrical outcomes.

A multicentric randomized study comparing two techniques of magnification assisted loop excision of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: video exoscopy and colposcopy.

PURPOSE: To compare loop excisions of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN 2+) under video exoscopy, or colposcopic guidance, with respect to safety and effectiveness. METHODS: Prospective multicentric randomized trial of 300 patients, undergoing loop excision for CIN 2+ either under video exoscopy (group A) or colposcope (group B) guidance. Intra- and post-operative complications, resection margins, and removed cervical volume in both groups were evaluated. RESULTS: 19.3 % of patients in video exoscopy group and 15.5 % in colposcopy group (p = 0.67) had transformation zone (TZ) 3. 45/151 (29.8 %) of group A patients and 48/149 (32.2 %) of group B patients underwent top-hat procedure, i.e., one superficial excision followed by one deeper removal of the endocervical tissue (p = 0.74). There was no difference in intra- and post-operative complications in the two groups. Positive endocervical resection margins (R0) were 9.9 % in video exoscopy group and 8.7 % in colposcopy group, respectively. Unclear endocervical resection margins (Rx) were 2.0 % in both groups. Mean total excised cervical volume was 1.20 cubic centimeter (cc³) in group A, and 1.24 cc³ in group B, respectively. Recurrent disease occurred in 2.3 % of patients at 6 months follow-up. CONCLUSION: Magnification assisted loop excision of CIN 2+ is equally effective and safe under colposcopic and video exoscopy guidance. The latter technique could potentially offer an alternative treatment of CIN 2+ lesions for doctors unfamiliar with colposcope.