Cite this article
Volume | Year
European Journal of Gynaecological Oncology (EJGO) is published by IMR Press from Volume 40 Issue 1 (2019). Previous articles were published by another publisher on a subscription basis, and they are hosted by IMR Press on imrpress.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with S.O.G.
The problems of cervical conization for postmenopausal patients
K. Hasegawa1,2,*, Y. Torii3, R. Kato4, Y. Udagawa1,3, I. Fukasawa1
1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu, Tochigi, Japan
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Banbuntane Hotokukai Hospital, Fujita Health University, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan
3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan
4 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tokyo Medical University, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Eur. J. Gynaecol. Oncol. 2016, 37(3), 327–331; https://doi.org/10.12892/ejgo2857.2016
Published: 10 June 2016
Purpose: Cervical conization is the definitive treatment for women of any age who have cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN). However, complications of the procedure have not been fully investigated in postmenopausal patients. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the results and complications of cervical conization performed on premenopausal and postmenopausal patients. Materials and Methods: This study recruited 405 patients who had undergone cervical laser conization. The median age was 36 years (range 20 to 75), and there were 361 (89.1%) premenopausal and 44 (10.9%) postmenopausal women. Results: The length of the cone removed from the postmenopausal patients was significantly longer than the length from the premenopausal patients (17.9 ± 3.9 mm vs. 15.7 ± 3.6 mm, respectively; p = 0.02). The rate of positive endocervical cone margins from the premenopausal patients was significantly higher than the rate from the postmenopausal patients (9.1% vs. 0%, respectively; p = 0.037). The rate of cervical stenosis was significantly higher in postmenopausal patients than in premenopausal patients (59.1% vs. 8.3%; respectively; p < 0.0001). There was no difference in the rates of frequency of intraoperative complications. Conclusions: Although deep incision is mandatory for complete excision of CIN in postmenopausal patients, it increases the incidence of cervical stenosis. Cervical conization may be a less invasive surgical procedure for older women with CIN than hysterectomy; however, the risk of postoperative complications remains, causing a dilemma for physicians treating postmenopausal women with CIN.
Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia