Article Text

Download PDFPDF

#223 Recurrence-free survival of cervical adenocarcinoma in situ following lletz, conisation or hysterectomy
  1. Mirte Schaafsma1,2,3,
  2. Teska Schuurman1,4,
  3. Pien Kootstra1,
  4. Ivo Hermans5,
  5. Albert Siebers6,
  6. Maaike Bleeker2,3,
  7. Petra Zusterzeel7,
  8. Ruud Bekkers5,
  9. Constantijne H Mom4 and
  10. Nienke EVan Trommel1
  1. 1Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Center of Gynecologic Oncology Amsterdam, location Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2Department of Pathology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, location VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3Department of Imaging and Biomarkers, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  4. 4Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Center of Gynecologic Oncology Amsterdam, location Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  5. 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
  6. 6PALGA, The Nationwide Network and Registry of Histo- and Cytopathology in the Netherland, Houten, The Netherlands
  7. 7Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands


Introduction/Background Internationally, there is little consensus about the best treatment for cervical adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), i.e., large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ), conisation, or (supplementary) hysterectomy after completion of childbearing. This study aims to compare the incidence of recurrent AIS and progression to adenocarcinoma following these treatments.

Methodology From the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Databank (Palga) AIS patients who underwent treatment between 2011 and 2021 in the Netherlands were identified. Their survival status was retrieved from the Central Bureau of Genealogy. Patients diagnosed with cervical cancer within 3 months after AIS treatment were excluded. The cumulative incidence of recurrent AIS and progression to adenocarcinoma following LLETZ, conisation, and hysterectomy were compared.

Results In total, 2,443 patients with AIS were identified, of whom 21,617 pathology reports were available. Primary treatment consisted of 1,069 LLETZ, 1,085 conisations, and 289 hysterectomies. Recurrent AIS was diagnosed in 73 patients and progression to adenocarcinoma occurred in 12 patients. The cumulative incidence of recurrent AIS after LLETZ was 6.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.1–8.0), after conisation 2.6% (95% CI: 1.2–4.0), and after hysterectomy no recurrences occurred. The cumulative incidence of progression to adenocarcinoma was 0.6% (95%CI: 0.1–1.1), 0.8% (95%CI: 0.1–1.4), and 0.4% (95%CI: 0–1.3) following LLETZ, conisation, and hysterectomy, respectively. The cumulative incidence of recurrent AIS did not differ between LLETZ versus hysterectomy (p=0.992) and conisation versus hysterectomy (p=0.993), but the cumulative incidence of recurrent AIS was increased following LLETZ compared to conisation (HR2.27, 95%CI: 1.38–3.71; p=0.001). The rate of progression to adenocarcinoma did not differ between LLETZ, conisation and hysterectomy.

Conclusion Conisation is a safe treatment for AIS compared to hysterectomy. For LLETZ the recurrence and progression rates are slightly elevated but still low, indicating that LLETZ could be offered as superior fertility-sparing treatment in women motivated to adhere to stringent follow-up.

Disclosures Nothing to disclose.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.