Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Obstetrics & Gynecology 1992;79:485-489
© 1992 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ROMAN, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by WHARTON, J T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by ROMAN, L. D.
Right arrow Articles by WHARTON, J T.

Reasons for Inappropriate Simple Hysterectomy in the Presence of Invasive Cancer of the Cervix

LYNDA D. ROMAN, MD, MITCHEL MORRIS, MD, PATRICIA J. EIFEL, MD, THOMAS W. BURKE, MD, DAVID M. GERSHENSON, MD and J TAYLOR WHARTON, MD

From the Departments of GynecoIogy and Radiotherapy, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

Abstract

We evaluated 148 women who had had simple hysterectomy in the presence of invasive cervical cancer between the years 1973-1987. Two had microinvasive squamous carcinoma for which hysterectomy was not a planned procedure. The remaining 146 women all had either adenocarcinoma or squamous carcinoma exhibiting greater than 3 mm of stromal invasion or lymph-vascular space involvement. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively to determine the reasons for hysterectomy. Causes of inappropriate hysterectomy were as follows: inadequate evaluation of an abnormal Papanicolaou smear or cervical biopsy (21%), failure to perform an indicated conization (12%), deliberate hysterectomy for grossly invasive cancer of the cervix (11%), lack of preoperative Papanicolaou smear (7%), conization margins positive or not evaluated (7%), misreading of pathology results (5%), emergent operation because of bleeding (3%), failure to check cytology preoperatively (1.5%), and failure to biopsy a gross cervical lesion (1.5%). The remaining 31% of cases had normal or inflammatory Papanicolaou smears and negative cervical examinations. Although 93% of this latter group complained of abnormal bleeding, 78% did not have endocervical or endometrial sampling preoperatively. Despite the increasing emphasis on cervical cancer screening, the number of referrals following hysterectomy performed in the presence of cervical carcinoma is not decreasing. Most cases could be avoided by careful adherence to well-established guidelines for cervical cancer detection.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.