Abstract
Aims and Background
Our aim was to investigate whether loop excision is an acceptable alternative to traditional cold knife conization of the cervix.
Patients and Methods
240 with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) were randomly assigned to loop excision (n = 120) or cold knife conization (n = 120). Success and complication rates of both methods were analysed.
Results
100% of cold knife conization and 98% of loop excision surgical specimens were positive for dysplasia. The rate of complete resection was 91% in the cold knife and 82% in the loop excision group, but histologic confirmation of residual CIN was obtained in only 2 (1.7%) women after cold knife conization and in 5 (4.2%) after loop excision. Loop excision cones were significantly shallower than those obtained by a cold knife. Secondary surgical procedures due to early hemorrhage were performed in 9 (7.5%) patients treated with cold knife conization and in 8 (6.7%) treated with loop excision. Elevated temperature postoperatively was observed in 16.4% of patients after cold knife conization and in 13.9% after loop excision. There were no other postoperative complications.
Conclusions
The results suggest that cold knife conization and loop excision are comparable and equally effective diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for CIN.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.