The efficacy of conservative management after conization in patients with stage IA1 microinvasive cervical carcinoma

References

• Mestwerdt G. Die Frühdiagnose des Kollumkarzinoms. Z Geburtshilfe Gynakol. 1947; 69: 198–202
   Google Scholar
• Creasman W. New gynecologic cancer staging. Gynecol Oncol. 1995; 58: 157–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bisseling KC, Bekkers RL, Rome RM, Quinn MA. Treatment of microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: a retrospective study and review of the literature. Gynecol Oncol. 2007; 107(3)424–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Östör A. Early invasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2000; 19: 29–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reich O, Lahousen M, Pickel H, Tamussino K, Winter R. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III: long-term follow-up after cold-knife conization with involved margins. Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 99: 193–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bar-Am A, Daniel Y, Ron IG, Niv J, Kupferminc MJ, Bornstein J, et al. Combined colposcopy, loop conization, and laser vaporization reduces recurrent abnormal cytology and residual disease in cervical dysplasia. Gynecol Oncol. 2000; 78: 47–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen ES, Nielsen K, Pedersen B. Combination laser conization as treatment of microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1998; 19: 352–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tseng CJ, Horng SG, Soong YK, Hsueh S, Hsieh CH, Lin HW. Conservative conization for microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 176: 1009–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roman LD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Agahjanian A, Qian D, Morrow CP. Risk of residual invasive disease in women with microinvasive squamous cancer in a conization specimen. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90: 759–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurgel MS, Bedone AJ, Andrade LA, Panetta K. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix: histological findings on cone specimens related to residual neoplasia on hysterectomy. Gynecol Oncol. 1997; 65: 437–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang DY, Cheng WF, Torng PL, Chen RJ, Huang SC. Prediction of residual neoplasia based on histopathology and margin status of conization specimens. Gynecol Oncol. 1996; 63: 53–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mota F. Microinvasive squamous carcinoma of the cervix: treatment modalities. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003; 82: 505–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creasman WT, Fetter BF, Clarke-Pearson DL, Kaufmann L, Parker RT. Management of stage IA carcinoma of the cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985; 153: 164–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delgado G, Bundy BN, Fowler WC, Stehman FB, Sevin B, Creasman WT, et al. A prospective surgical pathological study of stage I squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 1989; 35: 314–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greer BE, Figge DC, Tamimi HK, Cain JM, Lee RB. Stage IA2 squamous carcinoma of the cervix: difficult diagnosis and therapeutic dilemma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990; 162: 1406–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolstadt P. Follow-up study of 232 patients with stage IA1 and 411 patients with stage IA2 squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix (microinvasive carcinoma). Gynecol Oncol. 1989; 33: 265–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burghardt E, Girardi F, Lahousen M, Pickel H, Tamussino K. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Cancer 1991; 67: 1037–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sevin B, Nadji M, Averette HE, Hilsenbeck S, Smith D, Lampe B. Microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Cancer. 1992; 72: 2121–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lecuru F, Neji K, Robin F, De Bievre P, Vilde F, Taurelle R. Microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Rationale for conservative treatment in early squamous cell carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1997; 18: 465–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benedet JL, Anderson GH. Stage IA carcinoma of the cervix revisited. Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 87: 1052–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd JH, Milliken DA. Conservative surgery for carcinoma of the cervix. Clin Oncol. 2008; 20(6)395–400
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burghardt E, Ostor A, Fox H. The new FIGO definition of cervical cancer stage IA: a critique. Gynecol Oncol. 1997; 65: 1–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostor AG. Pandora's box or Ariadne's thread? Definition and prognostic significance of microinvasion in the uterine cervix: squamous lesions. In: Pathology Annual, Part II, 30. Melbourne: Department of Pathology, 1995. pp. 103–36.
   Google Scholar
• Tseng CJ, Liang CC, Lin CT, Huang KG, Chou HH, Chang TC, et al. A study of diagnostic failure of loop conization in microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix. Gynecol Oncol. 1999; 73: 91–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggan BD, Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Gebhardt JA, Groshen S, Morrow CP, et al. Cold-knife conization versus conization by loop electrosurgical excision procedure: a randomized, prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180: 276–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacalone PL, Laffargue F, Aligier N, Roger P, Combecal J, Daures JP. Randomized study comparing two techniques of conization: cold knife versus loop excision. Gynecol Oncol. 1999; 75: 356–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felix JC, Muderspach LI, Duggan BD, Roman LD. The significance of positive margins in loop electrosurgical cone biopsies. Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 84: 996–1000
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sedlis A, Sall S, Tsukada Y, Park R, Mangan C, Shingleton H, et al. Microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix: a clinical-pathological study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979; 133: 64–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson-Brown S, Chappatte OA, Clark SK, Wright A, Maxwell P, Taub NA, et al. The significance of cone biopsy resection margins. Gynecol Oncol. 1992; 42: 182–5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bekkers RL, Keyser KG, Bulten J, Hanselaar AG, Schijf CP, Boonstra H, et al. The value of loop electrosurgical conization in the treatment of stage IA1 microinvasive carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2002; 12: 485–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar