Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
You searched for:"Flávio Daniel Saavedra Tomasich"
We found (1) results for your search.Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2011;33(11):334-340
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032011001100003
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of various factors related to the conization process in cytological/histological cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CIN), after therapeutic conization. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who had undergone conization due to CIN 2 and 3, from January 1999 to January 2006. They were divided into two groups: case group (residual disease or recurrence) and control group (without residual disease or recurrence), during 18 months of follow up. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to define the predictive factors of disease recurrence. The c2 test or Fisher exact test was used for statistical analysis, with the level of significance set at p£0.05. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients showed recurrence/progression of CIN (case group) and 65 showed no recurrence/progression of disease (control group). Age and parity were similar in the two groups, as determined by calculation of the mean and standard deviation. There was no difference in smoking habits or in the use of contraceptive methods. The recurrence rate was 14.6%. Only conization positive margins were predictors of recurrence/progression (p<0.001). The conization techinique, the surgeon, CIN grade, gland involvement, and size of the uterine volume removed were not related to the evolution of disease after surgery. CONCLUSION: The recurrence of CIN 2 and 3 was related to positive margins in the product of conization.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2011;33(11):334-340
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032011001100003
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of various factors related to the conization process in cytological/histological cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CIN), after therapeutic conization. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who had undergone conization due to CIN 2 and 3, from January 1999 to January 2006. They were divided into two groups: case group (residual disease or recurrence) and control group (without residual disease or recurrence), during 18 months of follow up. Univariate and multivariate analysis were used to define the predictive factors of disease recurrence. The c2 test or Fisher exact test was used for statistical analysis, with the level of significance set at p£0.05. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients showed recurrence/progression of CIN (case group) and 65 showed no recurrence/progression of disease (control group). Age and parity were similar in the two groups, as determined by calculation of the mean and standard deviation. There was no difference in smoking habits or in the use of contraceptive methods. The recurrence rate was 14.6%. Only conization positive margins were predictors of recurrence/progression (p<0.001). The conization techinique, the surgeon, CIN grade, gland involvement, and size of the uterine volume removed were not related to the evolution of disease after surgery. CONCLUSION: The recurrence of CIN 2 and 3 was related to positive margins in the product of conization.
