83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10838299)
1. Positive margins after cervical conization as an indicator of residual dysplasia.
Huang M; Anderson P
Prim Care Update Ob Gyns; 1998 Jul; 5(4):160-161. PubMed ID: 10838299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Repeat surgery in patients with cervical cancer stage FIGO IA1: a series of 156 cases and a review of the literature.
Hefler LA; Polterauer S; Schneitter A; Concin N; Hofstetter G; Bentz E; Leipold H; Tempfer C; Reinthaller A
Anticancer Res; 2010 Feb; 30(2):565-8. PubMed ID: 20332471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Predictors and clinical significance of the positive cone margin in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia III patients.
Sun XG; Ma SQ; Zhang JX; Wu M
Chin Med J (Engl); 2009 Feb; 122(4):367-72. PubMed ID: 19302737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Resection margins in conization as prognostic marker for relapse in high-grade dysplasia of the uterine cervix in northern Norway: a retrospective long-term follow-up material.
Ørbo A; Arnesen T; Arnes M; Straume B
Gynecol Oncol; 2004 May; 93(2):479-83. PubMed ID: 15099966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cervical cone margins as a predictor for residual dysplasia in post-cone hysterectomy specimens.
Phelps JY; Ward JA; Szigeti J; Bowland CH; Mayer AR
Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Jul; 84(1):128-30. PubMed ID: 8008307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Human papillomavirus test after conization in predicting residual disease in subsequent hysterectomy specimens.
Park JY; Kim DY; Kim JH; Kim YM; Kim YT; Nam JH
Obstet Gynecol; 2009 Jul; 114(1):87-92. PubMed ID: 19546763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Management of patients with positive margins after cervical conization.
Lapaquette TK; Dinh TV; Hannigan EV; Doherty MG; Yandell RB; Buchanan VS
Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Sep; 82(3):440-3. PubMed ID: 8355949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Outcomes of Laser Conization for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2-3 and Microinvasive Cervical Cancer.
Kanayama S; Nakagawa E; Ueno S; Muraji M; Wakahashi S; Sudo T; Yamada T; Yamaguchi S; Fujiwara K; Nishimura R
World J Oncol; 2014 Apr; 5(2):62-67. PubMed ID: 29147379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Conservative management of options for patients with dysplasia involving endocervical margins of cervical cone biopsy specimens.
Monk A; Pushkin SF; Nelson AL; Gunning JE
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1996 Jun; 174(6):1695-9; discussion 1699-700. PubMed ID: 8678129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Positive endocervical margins at conization: repeat conization or colposcopic follow-up? A retrospective study.
Chambo Filho A; Garbeloto E; Guarconi JR; Partele MP
J Clin Med Res; 2015 Jul; 7(7):540-4. PubMed ID: 26015819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Conization with positive margins: what strategy should be adopted?].
Bretelle F; Cravello L; Yang L; Benmoura D; Roger V; Blanc B
Ann Chir; 2000 Jun; 125(5):444-9. PubMed ID: 10925486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Predictors of residual carcinoma or carcinoma-in-situ at hysterectomy following cervical conization with positive margins.
Diaz ES; Aoyama C; Baquing MA; Beavis A; Silva E; Holschneider C; Cass I
Gynecol Oncol; 2014 Jan; 132(1):76-80. PubMed ID: 24262876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prediction of residual neoplasia based on histopathology and margin status of conization specimens.
Chang DY; Cheng WF; Torng PL; Chen RJ; Huang SC
Gynecol Oncol; 1996 Oct; 63(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 8898168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Artifact in cervical LLETZ specimens: correlation with follow-up.
Ioffe OB; Brooks SE; De Rezende RB; Silverberg SG
Int J Gynecol Pathol; 1999 Apr; 18(2):115-21. PubMed ID: 10202667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Five-year follow up of patients with cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia in the cone margins after conization.
Vedel P; Jakobsen H; Kryger-Baggesen N; Rank F; Bostofte E
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 1993 Jun; 50(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 8365539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after conization: a study of 522 consecutive cervical cones.
Abdul-Karim FW; Nuñez C
Obstet Gynecol; 1985 Jan; 65(1):77-81. PubMed ID: 3966027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Discrepancy of cervical cytology and colposcopic biopsy: is cervical conization necessary?
McCord ML; Stovall TG; Summitt RL; Ling FW
Obstet Gynecol; 1991 May; 77(5):715-9. PubMed ID: 2014085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical outcomes of patients with adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix treated by conization.
Taylor JS; Panico V; Caputo T; Gerber D; Gupta D; Pirog E; Holcomb K
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2014; 35(6):641-5. PubMed ID: 25556268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical value of cold knife conization as conservative management in patients with microinvasive cervical squamous cell cancer (stage IA1).
He Y; Wu YM; Zhao Q; Wang T; Wang Y; Kong WM; Song F; Duan W; Zhu L; Zhang WY
Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2014 Sep; 24(7):1306-11. PubMed ID: 24987910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors affecting residual lesion in women with cervical adenocarcinoma in situ after cone excisional biopsy.
Srisomboon J; Kietpeerakool C; Suprasert P; Siriaunkgul S; Khunamornpong S; Prompittayarat W
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2007; 8(2):225-8. PubMed ID: 17696736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
