{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02178217821782178, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0029702970297029703, 'mean_word_length': 5.31875, '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}}
[Diagnostic conization in clinical cervix cancer].

Various methods of tissue sampling are used to verify histologically a clinical carcinoma of the cervix. The question arises whether or not diagnostic cone biopsy has any influence on the treatment and/or the clinical course of this disease. The clinical and histological data and the follow-up of 185 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix were statistically evaluated. We found no difference between patients with or without cone biopsy in respect of complications, frequency of metastases or recurrences, and survival. However, our deliberations permit the following statement: cone biopsy is an appropriate method to diagnose cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) or microcarcinoma of the cervix and may--under certain conditions--even be the adequate therapy. However, cone biopsy lacks any advantage over other diagnostic methods if it is employed merely for the purpose of histological verification of clinical carcinoma of the cervix.