Is Cervical Punch Biopsy Enough for the Management of Low-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia?

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid



This study aimed to analyze the correlation between the histopathologic results of excisional procedure and cervical punch biopsy and to investigate the accuracy rates of colposcopic punch biopsy and cervical cytology to detect cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2 and/or more severe lesions (CIN 2+).

Materials and Methods

Two hundred six patients who underwent excisional procedure in the gynecologic oncology clinic of the Zeynep Kamil Women and Children Diseases Education and Research Hospital between 2004 and 2011 were enrolled in a retrospective study.


The correlation between the pathologic findings gained by excisional procedure and punch biopsy was weak ( p = .0001, κ = 0.03). The overall concordance rate between the pathologic findings of cervical biopsy and excisional procedure was 57.29%. The rates of detecting more severe lesions by excisional procedure when compared to biopsies (biopsy underestimation) were 71.42%, 22.91%, 37.03%, and 12.72% for biopsy results with negative, CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3/adenocarcinoma in situ lesions, respectively. Similarly, the rates of less severe lesions diagnosed by excisional procedure when compared to biopsies (biopsy overestimation) were 29.16%, 40.74%, and 15.45% for biopsy results with CIN 1, CIN 2, and CIN 3/adenocarcinoma in situ lesions, respectively. The rate of CIN 2+ lesions after excisional procedure in cases with previous biopsy results with either negative or CIN 1 was 27.27%.


Our results suggested that colposcopy-directed biopsy was neither a good diagnostic nor a reliable management method. We think that the indications of conization should be enlarged to avoid overlooking high-grade lesions.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles