To conclude knowledge about new colposcopic signs – ridge sign and inner border.

Česká verzia

Authors: J. Sláma
Authors place of work: Onkogynekologické centrum, Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika VFN a 1. LF UK, Praha, přednosta prof. MUDr. A. Martan, DrSc.
Published in the journal: Ceska Gynekol 2012; 77(1): 22-24
Category: Původní práce

Summary

Objective:
To conclude knowledge about new colposcopic signs –⁠ ridge sign and inner border.

Design:
Review article.

Setting:
Oncogynecological center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, General Faculty Hospital and 1^st Medical School of Charles University, Prague.

Methods and results:
Recently updated colposcopic classification includes two new colposcopic signs –⁠ ridge sign and inner border. Both are mainly present in lesions associated with oncogenic human papillomaviruses infection. Ridge sign represents thick opaque acetowhite epithelium irregularly growing in the squamocolumnar junction as ledges. Inner border is a sharp acetowhite demarcation within a less opaque acetowhite area. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of underlying high-grade lesion is 33.1% and 93.1% in ridge sign and 20% and 97% in inner border sign respectively.

Conclusions:
Ridge sign and inner border are new colposcopic signs, which improve sensitivity and specificity of colposcopic examination.

Key words:
CIN, colposcopy, ridge sign, inner border.

Zdroje

1. Burghardt, E., Girardi, F., Pickel, H. Coposcopy –⁠ Cervical pathology. 3rd ed. London: George Thieme Verlag, 1998, 323 p.

2. Hellberg, D., Nilsson, S. 20-year experience of follow-up of the abnormal smear with colposcopy and histology and treatment by conization or cryosurgery. Gynecol Oncol, 1990, 8, p. 166-169.

3. http://www.ifcpc.org/documents/nomenclature7-11.pdf

4. Jeronimo, J., Schiffman, M. Colposcopy at a crossroads. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2006, 195, p. 349-353.

5. Kierkegaard, O., Byrjalsen, C., Hansen, KC., et al. Association between colposcopic findings and histology in cervical lesions: The significance ot the size of the lesion. Gynecol Oncol, 1995, 57, p. 66-71.

6. Reid, R. Biology and colposcopic features of human papillomavirus-associated cervical disease. Obstet Gynecol North Am, 1993, 20, p. 123-151.

7. Reid, R., Scalzi, P. An improved colposcopic index for differentiating benign papillomaviral infections from high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1985, 15, p. 611-618.

8. Scheungraber, C., Glutig, K., Fechtel, B., et al. Inner border -⁠ a specific and significant colposcopic sign for moderate or severe dysplasia (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or 3). J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2009, 13, p. 1-4.

9. Scheungraber, C., Koenig, U., Fechtel, B., et al. The colposcopic feature ridge sign is associated with the presence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 and human papillomavirus 16 in young women. J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2009, 13, p. 13-16.

10. Turyna, R., Sláma, J. Kolposkopie děložního hrdla. Praha: Galén, 2009, 173 s.

11. Zahm, DM., Nindl, I., Greinke, C., et al. Colposcopic appearence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia is age dependent. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1998, 179, p. 1298-1304.