{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.042821158690176324, 'fraction_numerical': 0.031486146095717885, 'mean_word_length': 4.614840989399293, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparative Risk of High-Grade Histopathology Diagnosis After a CIN 1 Finding in Endocervical Curettage Versus Cervical Biopsy

Objective No evidence-based clinical management recommendations exist for women with an endocervical curettage (ECC) cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 (CIN 1) result when the concurrent cervical biopsy is not high-grade. For women with these pathologic findings, we assessed their short-term risk of high-grade histopathologic diagnosis in the Calgary Health Region where ECC was routinely performed. Materials and Methods We analyzed pathology and colposcopy reports from 1,902 referral colposcopies where both ECC and biopsies were normal or CIN 1. We calculated the short-term risk of CIN 2 or more severe (CIN 2+) detected 12 to 24 months after colposcopy. Pearson &khgr;2 tests or Fisher exact tests were used to compare risks of a CIN 2+ diagnosis between combinations of test results and strata of risk factors. Results The short-term risk of CIN 2+ was the same after a CIN 1 biopsy and CIN 1 ECC (4.9% of 1,389 vs 5.0% of 359, respectively, p = .37). Compared with low-grade referral cytology, the risk of CIN 2+ after high-grade cytology was elevated significantly for CIN 1 ECC (13.3% vs 3.3%, p < .01) and nonsignificantly for CIN 1 biopsy (7.1% vs 4.6%, p = .12). Conclusions After low-grade cytology, the short-term risk of a high-grade histologic diagnosis in women with either CIN 1 ECC or biopsy is equivalent, suggesting similar management. A CIN 1 ECC may warrant different management in the context of high-grade referral cytology.