The case for cytologic follow-up after LEEP

29Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine our loop electrocautery excisional procedure (LEEP) biopsy experience to assess the incidence of abnormal follow-up and relate this to margin status. STUDY DESIGN: Records of 162 LEEP procedures performed between January 1992 and April 1994 were reviewed to evaluate margin readability and status. All follow-up cytologic or histologic specimens were examined. RESULTS: After a mean 10.9-month follow-up, of 162 cases, 67 had a negative study (41.4%). Fifty-four (33.3%) had an abnormal result, with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) in 16 cases (13.2%) of all LEEPs with follow-up, low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions in 27 (22.3%) and squamous atypia in 11 (9.1%). On microscopic review of these 54 cases, 37 had a readable margin (68.5%); of these readable margins, 12 (32.4%) were positive. Forty-one cases (25.3% of all LEEPs) had no follow-up study. CONCLUSION: The high incidence of HSIL after LEEP highlights the need for vigilant follow-up. Prediction of follow-up by margin status is dubious. Thermal artifact makes the margin uninterpretable in many cases, and two-thirds of cases with abnormal follow-up occurred where the LEEP margin was negative. Our finding of no follow-up for 25% of LEEPs performed is particularly disturbing in light of these results. © 1997 The International Academy of Cytology Acta Cytologica.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hanau, C. A., & Bibbo, M. (1997). The case for cytologic follow-up after LEEP. Acta Cytologica, 41(3), 731–736. https://doi.org/10.1159/000332695

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free