Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

You searched for:"Liliana Aparecida Lucci de Angelo Andrade"

We found (2) results for your search.
  • Original Article

    Underdiagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 orWorse Lesion inWomenwith a Previous Colposcopy-Guided Biopsy Showing CIN 1

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2017;39(3):123-127

    Summary

    Original Article

    Underdiagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 orWorse Lesion inWomenwith a Previous Colposcopy-Guided Biopsy Showing CIN 1

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2017;39(3):123-127

    DOI 10.1055/s-0037-1599071

    Views5

    Abstract

    Objective

    Expectant follow-up for biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 is the current recommendation for the management of this lesion. Nevertheless, the performance of the biopsy guided by colposcopy might not be optimal. Therefore, this study aimed to calculate the rate of underdiagnoses of more severe lesions in women with CIN 1 diagnosis and to evaluate whether age, lesion extent and biopsy site are factors associated with diagnostic failure.

    Methods

    Eighty women with a diagnosis of CIN 1 obtained by colposcopy-guided biopsy were selected for this study. These women were herein submitted to large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). The prevalence of lesions more severe than CIN 1 was calculated, and the histological diagnoses of the LLETZ specimens were grouped into two categories: "CIN 1 or less" and "CIN 2 or worse."

    Results

    The prevalence of lesions diagnosed as CIN 2 or worse in the LLETZ specimens was of 19% (15/80). Three women revealed CIN 3, and 1 woman revealed a sclerosing adenocarcinoma stage I-a, a rare type of malignant neoplasia of low proliferation, which was not detected by either colposcopy or previous biopsy. The underdiagnosis of CIN 2 was not associated with the women's age, lesion extension and biopsy site.

    Conclusions

    The standard methods used for the diagnosis of CIN 1 may underestimate the severity of the true lesion and, therefore, women undergoing expectant management must have an adequate follow-up.

    See more
  • Original Article

    Preoperative Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Non-epithelial Ovarian Tumors: Clinical Features and Tumor Markers

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2020;42(9):555-561

    Summary

    Original Article

    Preoperative Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Non-epithelial Ovarian Tumors: Clinical Features and Tumor Markers

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2020;42(9):555-561

    DOI 10.1055/s-0040-1712993

    Views4

    Abstract

    Objective

    To evaluate the role of clinical features and preoperativemeasurement of cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymis protein(HE4), and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) serum levels in women with benign and malignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors.

    Methods

    One hundred and nineteen consecutive women with germ cell, sex cordstromal, and ovarian leiomyomas were included in this study. The preoperative levels of biomarkers were measured, and then surgery and histopathological analysis were performed. Information about the treatment and disease recurrence were obtained from the medical files of patients.

    Results

    Our sample included 71 women with germ cell tumors (64 benign and 7 malignant), 46 with sex cord-stromal tumors (32 benign and 14 malignant), and 2 with ovarian leiomyomas. Among benign germ cell tumors, 63 were mature teratomas, and, amongmalignant, fourwere immatureteratomas. Themost common tumors in the sex cordstromal group were fibromas (benign) and granulosa cell tumor (malignant). The biomarker serum levels were not different among benign andmalignant non-epithelial ovarian tumors. Fertility-sparing surgeries were performed in 5 (71.4%) women with malignant germ cell tumor. Eleven (78.6%) patients with malignant sex cord-stromal tumors were treated with fertility-sparing surgeries. Five women (71.4%) with germ cell tumors and only 1 (7.1%) with sex cord-stromal tumor were treated with chemotherapy. One woman with germ cell tumor recurred and died of the disease and one woman with sex cord-stromal tumor recurred.

    Conclusion

    Non-epithelial ovarian tumors were benign in the majority of cases, and the malignant caseswere diagnosed at initial stages with good prognosis. Themeasurements of CA125, HE4, and CEA serum levels were not useful in the preoperative diagnosis of these tumors.

    See more

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE