Comparison of the safety between conization and hysterectomy for
patients with cervical adenocarcinoma in situ
Abstract
Objective: To compare the safety between conization alone and
hysterectomy for patients with adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the
cervix. Design: A cohort study of AIS patients during 2007-2021.
Setting: Women’s Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine.
Population: A total of 453 AIS patients diagnosed by conization who
underwent cervical conizations only (n=153) or conization followed by
hysterectomy(n=300). Methods: The clinicopathological and follow-up data
were reviewed. Univariate analysis was examined by chi-square test and
multivariate analysis was performed by logistic regression analysis.
Main outcome measure: The rates of residual disease in specimens of
hysterectomy and repeated conization were compared between positive and
negative margin of conization. And the rates of recurrence were compared
between patients treated by conization(s) alone and hysterectomy. The
factors influencing residual disease and recurrence were assessed,
respectively. Results: Among 310 specimens of hysterectomy or repeated
conization, the rates of residual disease were 50.56% (45/89) for
positive margin and 2.26% (5/221) for negative margin, with a
significant difference (p=0.000). Totally 4 patients recurred as vaginal
intraepithelial neoplasia(VAIN)in those treated by hysterectomy and 1
recurred as cervical squamous intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in those
treated by conization(s) alone. The rates of recurrence were 0.65%
(1/153) for conization(s) alone and 1.33 % (4/300) for hysterectomy,
with no significant difference (p=0.431). Hysterectomy was a factor
influencing neither residual disease nor recurrence. Conclusions:
Conization is an effective and safe option for patients with AIS of the
cervix, provided the margin is negative. Keywords: adenocarcinoma in
situ, conization, hysterectomy, margins.