Open Access

Analysis of the risk factors of residual lesions after conization and prognosis of multifocal micro‑invasive squamous cell cervical carcinoma treated with different types of surgery

  • Authors:
    • Chengyan Luo
    • Jiangnan Qiu
    • Jie Zhang
    • Lin Yuan
    • Chang Liu
    • Cong Wang
    • Yang Li
    • Liya Zhang
    • Wenjun Cheng
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: July 30, 2019     https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2019.1904
  • Pages: 364-370
  • Copyright: © Luo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License [CC BY_NC 4.0].

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the residual lesions after conization and the clinical outcome of patients with multifocal micro‑invasive squamous cell cervical carcinomas (MMSCCs) treated with different surgical strategies. A retrospective study was carried out in 98 patients with MMSCCs diagnosed by conization and treated between January 2010 and December 2016 in 2 institutions. The patients underwent further different surgeries as therapeutic conization, extrafascial hysterectomy (ES), modified radical hysterectomy (MRH), radical hysterectomy (RH) with or without pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) and regular follow‑up. The clinicopathological characteristics of all of the patients were recorded. The risk factors of residual lesions and that of the recurrence were also analyzed in the present study. The logistic regression analysis revealed that cone margins (P=0.001) were correlated with residual disease after conization whereas parameters including age, gravidity, parity, menopause, stage, LVSI and the number of lesions were not predictors of residual lesions. The cone margin status also indicated the incidence of residual disease as follows: The risk of residual disease was lower with a negative margin when compared with the margin with micro‑invasive carcinoma [MIC; odds ratio (OR)=0.064, P=0.012] and was lower in margin with a high‑grade intraepithelial lesion than the margin with MIC (OR=0.297, P=0.287). The Cox regression analysis revealed that there were no significant correlations between the following surgery scales and postoperative recurrences, nor were any significant correlations found between the recurrences and the gravidity and parity, postmenopausal state, stage, residual disease after conization, margin status, LVSI and number of lesions (P>0.05). Positive cone margin was the only predictive factor for residual disease in patients with MMSCCs. There were no significant correlations between the surgical scales and postoperative recurrences. This result may be due to the excellent prognosis of MICs despite multiple lesions, regardless the treatment.
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

October 2019
Volume 11 Issue 4

Print ISSN: 2049-9450
Online ISSN:2049-9469

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
APA
Luo, C., Qiu, J., Zhang, J., Yuan, L., Liu, C., Wang, C. ... Cheng, W. (2019). Analysis of the risk factors of residual lesions after conization and prognosis of multifocal micro‑invasive squamous cell cervical carcinoma treated with different types of surgery. Molecular and Clinical Oncology, 11, 364-370. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2019.1904
MLA
Luo, C., Qiu, J., Zhang, J., Yuan, L., Liu, C., Wang, C., Li, Y., Zhang, L., Cheng, W."Analysis of the risk factors of residual lesions after conization and prognosis of multifocal micro‑invasive squamous cell cervical carcinoma treated with different types of surgery". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 11.4 (2019): 364-370.
Chicago
Luo, C., Qiu, J., Zhang, J., Yuan, L., Liu, C., Wang, C., Li, Y., Zhang, L., Cheng, W."Analysis of the risk factors of residual lesions after conization and prognosis of multifocal micro‑invasive squamous cell cervical carcinoma treated with different types of surgery". Molecular and Clinical Oncology 11, no. 4 (2019): 364-370. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2019.1904