medigraphic.com

2012, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Arch Med Actual Trac Gen Inf 2012; 4 (6)

Colposcopy in the diagnosis of early cervical cancer

KÜHN W

Language: Spanish
References: 48
Page: 5
PDF size: 1047.20 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Cervical abnormalities, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and early cervical cancer are characterized by colposcopic minor (grade 1) and major (grade 2) changes and atypical vessels, described in the colposcopic terminology of the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (IFCP). In minor (grade 1) changes check-ups in most cases are sufficient. To avoid R1-resection in the cone biopsy (CIN in the margins) and conizatin associated premature birth, surgery should be performed under colposcopic visualisation. In the USA and Great Britain evidence based colposcopic guidelines were issued based on the cytological and colposcopic nomenclature. The German Society for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (AG-CPC) published recommendations for the daily practice for all findings. For screening purposes there is no evidence to recommend colposcopy. In case of atypical cytology colposcopy can reduce incidence and mortality of cervical cancer.


REFERENCES

  1. Albrechtsen S et al (2008) Pregnancy outcome in women before and after cervical conisation: population based cohort study. BMJ 337:1343

  2. AQUA – Institut für angewandte Qualitätsförderung und Forschung im Gesundheitswesen (Hrsg). Sektorenübergreifende Qualitätssicherung im Gesundheitswesen. Konisation. http://www.aqua-institut. de/. Zugegriffen: 26.10.2010

  3. Ballagh S (2004) Factors affecting the reproducibility and validity of colposcopy for product development: review of current literature. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 37:152–155

  4. Barrasso R (1992) Colposcopic diagnosis of HPV cervical lesions. IARC Sci Publ 119:67–74

  5. Baum ME et al (2006) Colposcopic accuracy of obstetrics and gynecologiy residents. Gynecol Oncol 103:966–970

  6. Bischoff-Everding C (2005) Optimierung des zytologischen Screeningintervalls in der Früherkennung des Zervixkarzinoms. Inaugural-Dissertation. Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, S 57

  7. Bischoff-Everding C et al (2007) Markov-Analyse zur Optimierung des Zervixkarzinomscreenings in Deutschland. Gyn 12:23–25

  8. Bornstein, J et al: 2011 IFCP Nomenclature, accepted in Rio World Congress, July 5, 2011. In preparation for publication 2012

  9. Cantor SB et al (2008) Accuracy of colposcopy in the diagnostic setting compared with the screening setting. Obstet Gynecol 111:7–14

  10. Cichon G, Kühn W, Schneider A (2011) Einfluss von Konisationen auf die Frühgeburtenrate in Deutschland. Eine Risikoberechnung. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 71:282–284

  11. Drechsler I, Kühn W et al: Histologische Kartographierung von kolposkopischen „minor“ und „major changes“ an Konisationspräparaten. Presentation. 21. Jahrestagung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Zervixpathologie und Kolposkopie. Berlin, 29.9.-1.10.2011 Berlin

  12. Ferris DG et al (2002) Colposcopy quality control for clinical trials: the positive effects from brief, intensive educational intervention. J Low Genit Tract Dis 6:11–15

  13. Ferris DG et al (2005) Interobserver agreement for colposcopy quality control using digitized colposcopic images during the ALTS trial. J Low Genit Tract Dis 9:29–35

  14. Ferris DG et al (2006) Prediction of cervical histological results using an abbreviated Reid colposcopic index during ALTS. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:704 – 710

  15. Gage JC et al (2006) Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 108:264–272

  16. Helmerhorst TJM (1992) Clinical significance of endocervical curettage as part of colposcopic evaluation. A review. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2:256–262

  17. Hopman EH (1995) Observer agreement on interpreting colposcopic images of CIN. Gynecol Oncol 58:206–209

  18. Hopman EH (2003) National Health Service Cervical Screening Program (NHS CSP) Guidelines for practice. Diagnostic standards in colposcopy

  19. IQWIG – Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (Hrsg) Nutzenbewertung des HPV-Tests im Primärscreening des Zervixkarzinoms. Vorläufiger Berichtsplan. https://www.iqwig. de/. Zugegriffen: 16.08.2010

  20. Kühn W (2010) Die Kolposkopie-Empfehlungen der AG Zervixpathologie und Kolposkopie. Frauenarzt 51:434–440

  21. Kühn W, Heinrich J: Kolposkopie in Klinik und Praxis. In: Römer T, Ebert AE (Hrsg) Frauenärztliche Taschenbücher. De Gruyter, Berlin, 2011, S 89

  22. Kühn W (2011): Kolpokopie zur Früherkennung des Zervixkarzinoms. Pathologe 32, 497-504

  23. Kühn W et al (2011): Morphologische Aspekte zu frühgeburtsvermeidenden Konisationstechniken. Gyn. Praktische Gynäkologie 16, 45-50

  24. Lickrish GM et al (1993) Colposcopy of adenocarcinoma in situ and invasive adenocarcinoma of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 20:111–122

  25. Marquardt K et al (2007) Zervixkarzinom trotz Früherkennungsprogramm. Frauenarzt 48:1086–1088

  26. Marteau TM et al (1990) Anxieties in women undergoing colposcopy. BJOG 97:859–861

  27. Melnikow J et al (1998) Natural history of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 92:727–735

  28. Mitchell MF et al (1998) Colposcopy for the diagnosis of squamous intraepithelial lesions: a metaanalysis. Obstet Gynecol 91:626–631

  29. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes (ed) (2004) Colposcopy and programme management. Guidelines for the NHS Cervical Screening Programme, NHSCSP Publication No 20, April 2004, ISBN 184463 014 5

  30. Nocon M et al (2007) Welchen medizinischen und gesundheitsökonomischen Nutzen hat die Kolposkopie als primäres Screening auf das Zervixkarzinom. Schriftenreihe Health Technology Assessment, Bd. 57. DIMDI, S 1. ISSN: 1864–9645

  31. Nygard JF et al (2004) CIN 2/3 and cervical cancer in an organised screening programme after an unsatisfactory or a normal Pap smear: a seven-year prospective study of the Norwegian population based screening programme. J Med Screen 11:70– 76

  32. Paraskevaidis E et al (1992) A population-based study of microinvasive disease of the cercix – a colposcopic and cytologic analysis. Gynecol Oncol 45:9–12

  33. Petry KU (2010) Piloting HPV screening in EU: The Wolfsburg experiment. 5th European Congress of the Federation for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. Berlin 27–29th May 2010, abstract, p 9

  34. Prendiville W (2009) The treatment of CIN: what are the risks? Cytopathology 20:145–153

  35. Pretorius RG et al (2001) The colposcopic impression. It is influencend by the colposcopist’s knowledge of the findings on the referral Papanicolaou smear? J Reprod Med 46:724–728

  36. Schädel D et al (2004) The suitable of digital colposcopy for telematic applications. Biomed Tech (Berl) 49:157–162

  37. Schädel D et al (2004) Digitale Kolposkopie bei Läsionen der Cervix uteri – Eine Pilotstudie unter Berücksichtigung telematischer Fragestellungen. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 64:1205–1212

  38. Schädel D, Kühn W (2006) Editorial: The role of new information and communication technologies in gynecological diagnosis of cervical cancer. J Turkish German Gynecol Assoc 74:280–281

  39. Schädel D et al (2007) Digital- und Telekolposkopie in der Früherkennung des Zervixkarzinoms aus der Sicht der Patientin – Ergebnisse einer Patientenbefragung zu Akzeptanz und Zufriedenheit mit einer IT-gestützten kolposkopischen Untersuchung. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 67:843–849

  40. Scheungraber C et al (2009) Inner border – a specific and significant colposcopic sign for moderate or severe dysplasia (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or 3). J Low Genit Tract Dis 13:1–4

  41. Scheungraber C et al (2009) The colposcopic feature ridge sign is associated with the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 and human papillomavirus 16 in young women. J Low Genit Tract Dis 13:13–16

  42. Sellors JW et al (1990) Observer variability in the scoring of colpophotographs. Obstet Gynecol 1990:1006–1008

  43. Sideri M et al (1995) Operator variability in disease detection and grading by colposcopy in patients with mild dysplastic smears. Cancer 76:1601–1605

  44. Soergel P et al (2011) Wie hoch sind die Kosten der Konisation unter Berücksichtigung schwangerschaftsassoziierter Komplikationen? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 71:199–204

  45. Soergel P, Hillemanns P (2011) Die Versorgung von Zervixdysplasien mittels Konisation in Deutschland. Frauenarzt 52:210–215

  46. Strander B et al (2005) The performance of a new scoring system for colposcopy in detecting highgrade dysplasia in the uterine cervix. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 84:1013–1017

  47. Walker P et al (2003) International terminology of colposcopy: an undated report from the international federation for cervical pathology and colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 101:175–177

  48. Wright TC et al (2002) Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 287:2120– 2129




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com