Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cervical conisation and the risk of preterm delivery: a retrospective matched pair analysis of a German cohort

  • General Gynecology
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Since the routine screening program for cervical dysplasia by Pap smear was established in the early 1970s, the rate of cervical cancer has continually dropped. Even if a high percentage of cervical dysplasia shows spontaneous restitution, the only effective therapy for persisting cervical dysplasia is local ablation or excision which might be associated with an increased risk of preterm delivery in subsequent pregnancies. However, data from German patients are missing, so the aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of preterm delivery and associated risks in a cohort of patients who had undergone cervical conisation previous to their pregnancies.

Methods

A total of 144 patients with conisation and subsequent pregnancy were identified. They were compared regarding week of delivery and preterm birth, fetal birth weight, fetal outcome and birth procedure (spontaneous delivery, vacuum extraction, primary and secondary cesarean section) with their matched partners.

Results

135 patients with singleton pregnancies and their matched partners were evaluated in the final analysis. The mean age was 33.5 years. Comparing the case and control group we reached significant different results for week of delivery, but not preterm birth defined as birth prior to 37 weeks of gestation.

Conclusions

Within this German cohort cervical conisation did not increase the risk for preterm birth, cesarean section or poor fetal outcome. We therefore conclude that cervical conisation is an appropriate method to treat women with cervical dysplasia also at childbearing age when prevention of cervical cancer is needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lelle RJ, Küppers V (2008) Kolposkopie in der Praxis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 1–2

  2. Russell M, Raheja V, Jaiyesimi R (2013) Human papillomavirus vaccination in adolescence. Perspect Public Health 133(6):320–324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Robert-Koch-Institut (2009) Epidemiologisches Bulletin Nr. 32, 319–328

  4. Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jeronimo J et al (2007) Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet 370(9590):9890–9907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. van Seters M, van Beurden M, ten Kate FJ, Beckmann I, Ewing PC, Eijkemans MJ, Kagie MJ, Meijer CJ, Aaronson NK, Kleinjan A, Heijmans-Antonissen C, Zijlstra FJ, Burger MP, Helmerhorst TJ (2008) Treatment of vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia with topical imiquimod. N Engl J Med 358(14):1465–1473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Grimm C, Polterauer S, Natter C, Rahhal J, Hefler L, Tempfer CB, Heinze G, Stary G, Reinthaller A, Speiser P (2012) Treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia with topical imiquimod: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 120(1):152–159

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, Katki HA, Kinney WK, Schiffman M, Solomon D, Wentzensen N, Lawson HW (2013) 2012 ASCCP Consensus Guidelines Conference. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. Obstet Gynecol 121(4):829–846. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182883a34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E (2006) Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intra-epithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Lancet 367:489–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Albrechtsen S, Rasmussen S, Thoresen S, Irgens LM, Iversen OE (2008) Pregnancy outcome in women before and after cervical conisation: population based cohort study. BMJ 18(337):a1343. doi:10.1136/bmj.a1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bruinsma F, Lumley J, Tan J, Quinn M (2007) Precancerous changes in the cervix and risk of subsequent preterm birth. BJOG 114(1):70–80

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jakobsson M, Gissler M, Sainio S, Paavonen J, Tapper AM (2007) Preterm delivery after surgical treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol 109:309–313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, Simoens C, Raifu AO, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E (2008) Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: meta-analysis. BMJ 18(337):a1284. doi:10.1136/bmj.a1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nam KH, Kwon JY, Kim YH, Park YW (2010) Pregnancy outcome after cervical conization: risk factors for preterm delivery and the efficacy of prophylactic cerclage. J Gynecol Oncol 21(4):225–229. doi:10.3802/jgo.2010.21.4.225

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Prendiville W, Cullimore J, Norman S (1989) Large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ). A new method of management for women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 96:1054–1060

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sadler L, Saftlas A, Wang W, Exeter M, Whittaker J, McCowan L (2004) Treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and risk of preterm delivery. JAMA 291(17):2100–2106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Samson SL, Bentley JR, Fahey TJ, McKay DJ, Gill GH (2005) The effect of loop electrosurgical excision procedure on future pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 105(2):325–332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Acharya G, Kjeldberg I, Hansen SM, Sørheim N, Jacobsen BK, Maltau JM (2005) Pregnancy outcome after loop electrosurgical excision procedure for the management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Arch Gynecol Obstet 272(2):109–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rode L, Tabor A (2014) Prevention of preterm delivery in twin pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gyneacol 28(2):273–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grimm C, Brammen L, Sliutz G, Weigert M, Sevelda P, Pils S, Reinthaller A, Polterauer S (2013) Impact of conization type on the resected cone volume: results of a retrospective multi-center study. Arch Geynecol Obstet 288:1081–1086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jin G, LanLan Z, Li C, Dan Z (2014) Pregnancy outcome following loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LLEP) a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289(1):85–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Macones GA, Cahill A, Stamilio D, Roehl K, Odibo A (2012) Does LEEp specimen size influence the risk of preterm birth? Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(1):S218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Heinonen A, Gissler M, Riska A, Paavonen J, Tapper AM, Jakobsson M (2013) Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and the risk for preterm delivery. Obstet Gynecol 121(5):1063–1068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lutenbacher M, Gabbe PT, Karp SM, Dietrich MS, Narrigan D, Carpenter L, Walsh W (2014) Does additional prenatal care in the home improve birth outcomes for women with a prior preterm delivery? A randomized clinical trial. Mater Child Health J 18(5):1142–1154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Whitehead NS (2012) The relationship of socioeconomic status to preterm contractions and preterm delivery. Matern Child Health J 16(8):1645–1656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Castanon A, Brocklehurst P, Evans H, Peebles D, Singh N, Walker P, Patnick J, Sasieni P (2012) Risk of preterm birth after treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among women attending colposcopy in England: retrospective-prospective cohort study. BMJ 16(345):e5174. doi:10.1136/bmj.e5174

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 34, 50931, Cologne, Germany

    Verena Kirn

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Campus Innenstadt, Maistrasse 11, 80337, Munich, Germany

    Pamina Geiger, Klaus Friese & Julia Knabl

  3. Institute of Social Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Haydnstrasse 5, 80336, Munich, Germany

    Christina Riedel

  4. Amedes MVZ for Gynecology and Pathology Munich GmbH, Maximilianstraße 38, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Florian Bergauer

  5. Klinik Hallerwiese, St.-Johannis-Mühlgasse 19, 90419, Nuremberg, Germany

    Franz Kainer & Julia Knabl

Authors
  1. Verena Kirn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pamina Geiger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christina Riedel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Florian Bergauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Klaus Friese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Franz Kainer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Julia Knabl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Verena Kirn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kirn, V., Geiger, P., Riedel, C. et al. Cervical conisation and the risk of preterm delivery: a retrospective matched pair analysis of a German cohort. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291, 599–603 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3463-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3463-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation