Diagnosis of Cervical Precancers by Endocervical Curettage at Colposcopy of Women With Abnormal Cervical Cytology
- PMID: 29112672
- PMCID: PMC5709212
- DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002330
Diagnosis of Cervical Precancers by Endocervical Curettage at Colposcopy of Women With Abnormal Cervical Cytology
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the performance of routine endocervical curettage (ECC) for diagnosing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 or worse and additional precancers not otherwise detected by ectocervical biopsies.
Methods: In a secondary analysis of the Biopsy Study, a cross-sectional study conducted between 2009 and 2012 at the University of Oklahoma Health and Sciences Center that found an incremental increase in detection of cervical precancers by multiple biopsies at colposcopy, ECC was performed in most women aged 30 years or older. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse yield by ECC alone was evaluated in analyses stratified by cervical cytology (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASC-US] or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions [LSIL] compared with atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions [ASC-H] or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions [HSIL] or worse), colposcopic impression (less than high-grade compared with high-grade), human papillomavirus (HPV)-16 infection status, whether the examination was satisfactory, and by ECC indications per the current guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The diagnostic value of ECC for detecting additional disease was evaluated by the number of lesion-directed ectocervical biopsies.
Results: Of the 204 women aged 30 years or older, 181 (88.7%) underwent ECC. Overall ECC detected 14.4% CIN 2 or worse (95% CI 10.0-20.2%). Endocervical curettage was more likely to find disease in the endocervix among women with high-grade cytology, positive HPV-16 infection, or high-grade colposcopic impressions (respective P values <.05). Among women with ASC-US or LSIL cytology, those with an unsatisfactory examination had a 13.0% CIN 2 or worse yield on ECC (95% CI 6.1-25.7); when colposcopic examination was normal or satisfactory with visible abnormal lesions, ECC detected less than 5% CIN 2 or worse in the endocervix. An ASC-H or HSIL or worse cytology was associated with a CIN 2 or worse yield of 25.8% by ECC (95% CI 16.6-37.9%). However, ECC found only 3.9% (95% CI 1.9-7.8%) additional CIN 2 or worse beyond the cumulative disease detected by up to four biopsies of visible acetowhite ectocervical lesions. Additional CIN 2 or worse yield by ECC increased when fewer lesion-directed biopsies were taken (P<.05).
Conclusion: The additional yield of CIN 2 or worse by ECC in a colposcopy with up to four ectocervical biopsies was low. Based on our findings, we recommend routine ECC be performed in women aged 45 years old or older with HPV-16 infection and in any woman aged 30 years or older with HSIL or worse or ASC-H cytology, high-grade colposcopic impression, or ASC-US or LSIL cytology and an unsatisfactory examination.
Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00339989.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.
Each author has indicated that he or she has met the journal’s requirements for
Similar articles
-
Diagnostic value of endocervical curettage for detecting dysplastic lesions in women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) and low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) Papanicolaou smears.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(8):3461-4. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.8.3461. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014. PMID: 24870740
-
[Stratified research on related risk factors of CINⅡ+ in CINⅠ patients diagnosed by endocervical curettage under colposcopy].Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Aug 25;57(8):608-617. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112141-20220520-00338. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 2022. PMID: 36008288 Chinese.
-
Pooled analysis on the necessity of random 4-quadrant cervical biopsies and endocervical curettage in women with positive screening but negative colposcopy.Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Apr;96(17):e6689. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006689. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017. PMID: 28445270 Free PMC article.
-
Cervical Cancer Screening: A Review.JAMA. 2023 Aug 8;330(6):547-558. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.13174. JAMA. 2023. PMID: 37552298 Review.
-
Risk of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2 or Worse by Cytology, Human Papillomavirus 16/18, and Colposcopy Impression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Sep;132(3):725-735. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002812. Obstet Gynecol. 2018. PMID: 30095780 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
The Value of Four-Quadrant Cervical Biopsy in Women with Different Colposcopic Impressions.Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jul 16;13(14):2384. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13142384. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37510128 Free PMC article.
-
The Effect of Random Biopsy and Endo-Cervical Curettage in Diagnosis of Precancerous Cervical Lesions in Women With Normal Colposcopy.J Family Reprod Health. 2024 Jun;18(2):108-114. doi: 10.18502/jfrh.v18i2.15934. J Family Reprod Health. 2024. PMID: 39011413 Free PMC article.
-
Observed Colposcopy Practice in US Community-Based Clinics: The Retrospective Control Arm of the IMPROVE-COLPO Study.J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2019 Apr;23(2):110-115. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000454. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2019. PMID: 30694884 Free PMC article.
-
Development and validation of a predictive model for endocervical curettage in patients referred for colposcopy: A multicenter retrospective diagnostic study in China.Chin J Cancer Res. 2022 Aug 30;34(4):395-405. doi: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2022.04.07. Chin J Cancer Res. 2022. PMID: 36199535 Free PMC article.
-
PAX1 methylation as a robust predictor: developing and validating a nomogram for assessing endocervical curettage (ECC) necessity in human papillomavirus16/18-positive women undergoing colposcopy.Clin Epigenetics. 2024 Jun 7;16(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s13148-024-01691-1. Clin Epigenetics. 2024. PMID: 38849868 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Davey DD, Neal MH, Wilbur DC, et al. Bethesda 2001 implementation and reporting rates: 2003 practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2004;128:1224–1229. - PubMed
-
- Wright TC, Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA. 2002;287:2120–2129. - PubMed
-
- Bidus Michael A, Elkas John C, Rodriguez Mildred, et al. The Clinical Utility of the Diagnostic Endocervical Curettage. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2005;48(1):202–08. - PubMed
-
- Jeronimo J, Massad LS, Castle PE, et al. Interobserver agreement in the evaluation of digitized cervical images. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:833–840. - PubMed
-
- Massad LS, Jeronimo J, Schiffman M. Interobserver agreement in the assessment of components of colposcopic grading. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:1279–1284. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous