Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the overtreatment rate at colposcopy in women who underwent a see-and-treat protocol. METHODS: We identified 3,192 patients (mean age 36 years, standard deviation 8.7) who underwent a see-and-treat protocol in Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center between January 1981 and December 2010. Overtreatment, defined as cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 1 or less at final histopathology analysis, was investigated in relation to the age of the women, time of referral, cervical smear result, colposcopic impression, and histopathology result. RESULTS: A total of 579 women (18.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.7-19.5) were overtreated. The lowest overtreatment rate (4.5%, 95% CI 3.5-5.5) was seen in women with both a high-grade cervical smear result and a high-grade colposcopic impression. Women aged younger than 40 years were less likely to be overtreated (13.1%, 95% CI 11.7-14.5) than women aged 40-49 years (24.2% 95% CI 21.2-27.4, number needed to harm nine) and aged 50 years and older (42.2%, 95% CI 36.5-47.7, number needed to harm three). CONCLUSIONS: The overtreatment rate is low for patients with both a high-grade smear result and a high-grade colposcopic impression, justifying a see-and-treat approach for these patients. In women with either a high-grade smear result or a high-grade impression on colposcopy, a see-and-treat approach may still be preferable but has higher overtreatment rates. Given the side effects of cervical surgery on pregnancy outcome, young women, in particular those who have either a low-grade smear result or low-grade impression on colposcopy, are better served by a two-step approach. In older women, a see-and-treat policy may be preferable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bosgraaf et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: