{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030803906836964687, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024793388429752067, 'mean_word_length': 5.373205741626794, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?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}}
Conservative Management of Positive Resection Margins After Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure

Objectives We sought to determine the pres-ence of residual neoplasia in women reported previously as having positive surgical margins after loop electrosurgical excision procedure of the cervix. Methods Of 460 loop electrosurgical excision procedures of the cervix, 127 (27.6%) had margins positive for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. We re-viewed the charts of 74 patients (58%). We found positive en-docervical margins in 68 of 74 (92%) and positive ectocervical margins in 4 of 74 (5%). In 2 of 74 (3%), the location of the positive margin was unknown. Patients were followed either with three consecutive Papanicolaou smears (n = 43) during the year after the procedure or with conization or hysterec-tomy (n = 31). Results The overall rate of spontaneous regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia was 64%. The small study sample does not permit us to conclude whether either positive ectocervical or endocervical margins were more amenable to recurrence. No invasive cancer was diagnosed in the study. Conclusions. With a reliable patient population, patients with cervical margins positive for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia after loop electrosurgical excision procedure can be followed safely with cytology.