Video colposcopy versus headlight for large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ): a randomised trial

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Purpose: To compare resected cone mass and resection margin status when performing Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ) using video colposcopy (LLETZ-VC) versus a headlight (LLETZ-HL) in women with cervical dysplasia. Methods: Prospective, randomised trial (monocentric) at a specialised cervical dysplasia unit in a University Hospital. Women with a biopsy-proven CIN2 + or persisting CIN1 or diagnostic LLETZ were recruited and randomised. LLETZ was performed either under video colposcopic vision or using a standard surgical headlight. The primary endpoint was resected cone mass. Secondary endpoints were the rate of involved margins, fragmentation of the specimen, procedure time, time to complete haemostasis (TCH), blood loss, pain, intra- and postoperative complications, and surgeon preference. Results: LLETZ-VC and LLETZ-HL (109 women each) had comparable cone masses (1.57 [0.98–2.37] vs. 1.67 [1.15–2.46] grams; P = 0.454). TCH was significantly shorter in the LLETZ-VC arm (60 [41–95.2] vs. 90 [47.2–130.2] seconds; P = 0.008). There was no statistically significant difference in involved resection margins (6/87 [6.5%] vs. 16/101 [13.7%], P = 0.068) and postoperative complications (13/82 [13.7%] vs. 22/72 [23.4%], P = 0.085). Patient-reported outcomes favoured LLETZ-VC with a lower use of analgesics (6/80 [7.0%] vs. 17/87 [16.3%]; P = 0.049). However, LLETZ-VC was more difficult to perform with significantly lower ratings for handling (7 [5–9] vs. 9 [8–10]; P < 0.001) and general satisfaction (7.5 [5–9] vs. 10 [8–10]; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Intraoperative video colposcopy for LLETZ has minimal benefits at the cost of surgeons’ satisfaction. Clinical trial registration: NCT04326049 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
Funding Information
  • Ruhr-Universität Bochum

This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit: