<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Акушерство и гинекология</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">0300-9092</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2412-5679</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Bionika Media</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">246547</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Статьи</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">SEVERE CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIAS (CIN II-III/CARCINOMA IN SITU) AND MICROCARCINOMA OF THE CERVIX UTERI IN PREGNANT WOMEN</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>ТЯЖЕЛЫЕ ЦЕРВИКАЛЬНЫЕ ИНТРАЭПИТЕЛИАЛЬНЫЕ НЕОПЛАЗИИ (CIN II-III/ ПРЕИНВАЗИВНЫЙ РАК) И МИКРОКАРЦИНОМА ШЕЙКИ МАТКИ У БЕРЕМЕННЫХ</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>KOROLENKOVA</surname><given-names>L. I</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>КОРОЛЕНКОВА</surname><given-names>Любовь Ивановна</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>канд. мед. наук, ст. науч. сотр. поликлиники</p></bio><email>l.korolenkova@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>BRYUZGIN</surname><given-names>V. V</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>БРЮЗГИН</surname><given-names>В. В</given-names></name></name-alternatives><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Российский онкологический научный центр им. Н.Н. Блохина РАМН</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2011-05-15" publication-format="electronic"><day>15</day><month>05</month><year>2011</year></pub-date><issue>5</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">NO5 (2011)</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">№5 (2011)</issue-title><fpage>68</fpage><lpage>73</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2023-02-17"><day>17</day><month>02</month><year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2011, Bionika Media</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2011, ООО «Бионика Медиа»</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2011</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Bionika Media</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">ООО «Бионика Медиа»</copyright-holder></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.eco-vector.com/0300-9092/article/view/246547">https://journals.eco-vector.com/0300-9092/article/view/246547</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Objective. To compare the clinical, morphological, and virologic characteristics of severe epithelial lesions and microcarcinomas of the cervix uteri in pregnant and nonpregnant women, to study disease and pregnancy outcomes, and to assess prognosis. Subjects and methods. Thirty-six pregnant women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasias (CIN), including 7 patients with CIN II, 23 with CIN III/carcinoma in situ (CIS), and 6 with microinvasive carcinoma of the cervix uteri, and 248 nonpregnant women with the same diagnoses. The clinical course of the disease was comparatively analyzed on the basis of cytological, virologic, colposcopic, and histologic findings and the results of treatment and follow-up. Results. All the patients were found to have varying epithelial lesions concurrent with colposcopic changes; viral load was significantly higher in pregnant women. Progressive gravid ectopy favored the hyperdiagnosis of a presumptive grade of CIN. The results of postpartum histological examination agreed with those of pregnancy biopsy in 44.4%; the degree of lesions was less in 22.2% and higher in 33.4%. Thirty-three of the 36 women successfully carried pregnancy. The mean follow-up was 26 months. All the patients are alive and have no recurrence of CIN and cancer of the cervix uteri. The infants are developing normally. Conclusion. Full-term pregnancy does not worsen disease prognosis in CIN II-III, including CIS. Targeted biopsies under colposcopic guidance are safe and advisable to define the degree of a lesion, they are indicated for suspected cases of severe CIN and invasion and are, however, also acceptable in other cases. If microinvasion is found, treatment may be delayed until after cesarean section.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Цель исследования. Сравнение клинико-морфологических и вирусологических характеристик тяжелых эпителиальных повреждений и микрокарциномы шейки матки у беременных и небеременных, изучение исходов заболевания и беременности, оценка прогноза. Материалы и методы. В исследование были включены 36 беременных женщин с цервикальными интраэпителиальными неоплазиями (CIN), в том числе 7 больных с CIN II, 23 больные с CIN III/CIS и 6 больных микроинвазивным раком шейки матки, а также 248 небеременных женщин с теми же диагнозами. Был проведен сравнительный анализ клинического течения болезни на основании данных цитологического, вирусологического, кольпоскопического и гистологического исследований, результатов лечения и наблюдения. Результаты исследования. У всех больных выявлены сочетание эпителиальных повреждений разной степени и кольпоскопические изменения, вирусная нагрузка была достоверно большей у беременных женщин. Прогрессивная гравидарная эктопия способствовала гипердиагностике предполагаемой степени CIN. Результаты гистологического исследования материала послеродового вмешательства совпали с биопсией во время беременности у 44,4%, степень повреждений была меньше у 22,2% и больше - у 33,4%. Из 36 женщин 33 благополучно доносили беременность. Средний срок наблюдения больных составил 26 мес. Все больные живы, без рецидива CIN и рака шейки матки. Дети развиваются нормально. Заключение. При CIN II—III, включая преинвазивный рак, донашивание беременности не ухудшает прогноз заболевания. Направленные биопсии под кольпоскопическим контролем безопасны и целесообразны для определения степени повреждения, показаны при подозрении на тяжелые степени CIN и инвазию, однако в других случаях также допустимы. При обнаружении микроинвазивного процесса возможна отсрочка лечения до родоразрешения кесаревым сечением.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>CIN II—III</kwd><kwd>cervical intraepithelial neoplasia II-III</kwd><kwd>papillomavirus infection</kwd><kwd>carcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri</kwd><kwd>microcarcinoma of the cervix uteri</kwd><kwd>pregnancy</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>папилломавирусная инфекция</kwd><kwd>преинвазивный рак шейки матки</kwd><kwd>микрокарцинома шейки матки</kwd><kwd>беременность</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Урманчеева А.Ф. Гинекологический рак в сочетании с беременностью // Практ. онкол. — 2009. — T.10, № 4. — C. 184—197.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Amant F., Van Calsteren K., Halaska M.J. et al. Gynecologic cancers in pregnancy: Guidelines of an international consensus meeting // Int. J. Gynecol. Cancer. — 2009. — Vol.19. — P. 1—12.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Apgar B.S., Kittendorf A.L., Bettcher C.M. et al. Update on ASCCP consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical screening tests and cervical histology // Am. Fam. Physician. — 2009. — Vol. 80, № 2. — P. 147—155.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Fader A.N., Alward E.K., Niederhauser A. et al. Cervical dysplasia in pregnancy: a multi-institutional evaluation // Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. — 2010. — Vol. 203, № 2. — P. 113; e1—6.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Kaplan K.J., Dainty L.A., Dolinsky B. et al. Prognosis and recurrence risk for patients with cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions diagnosed during pregnancy // Cancer. — 2004. — Vol. 102. — P. 228—232.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Kyrgiou M., Koliopoulos G., Martin-Hirsch P. et al. Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis// Lancet. — 2006. — Vol. 367. — P. 489—498.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Moscicki A.B., Shiboski S., Hills N.K. et al. Regression of low-grade squamous intra epithelial lesions in young women// Lancet. — 2004. — Vol. 364. — P. 1678—1683.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Patrelli T.S., Anfuso S., Vandi F. et al. Preterm delivery and premature rupture of membranes after conization in 80 women. Preliminary data // Minerva Ginecol. — 2008. — Vol. 60, № 4. — P. 295—298.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Robinson W., Webb S., Tirpack J. et al. Management of cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia during pregnancy with loop excision // Gynecol. Oncol. — 1997. — Vol. 64. — P. 153—155.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Selleret L., Mathevet P. Precancerous cervical lesions during pregnancy: diagnostic and treatment // J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. (Paris). — 2008. — Vol.37, (suppl. 1). — P. 131—138.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Serati M., Uccella S., Laterza R.M. et al. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia during pregnancy// Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. — 2008. — Vol. 87, № 12. — P. 1296—1300.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Siddiqui G., Kurzel R.B., Lampley E.C. et al. Cervical dysplasia in pregnancy: progression versus egression post-partum// Int. J. Fertil. Womens Med. — 2001. — Vol. 46. — P. 278—280.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Strinic T., Bukovic D., Karelovic D. et al. The effect of delivery on regression of abnormal cervical cytologic findings // Coll. Anthropol. — 2002. — Vol. 26. — P. 577—582.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Textbook of gynaecological oncology /Eds. A. Ayhan et al. — Güne§ Publishing, 2009. — P. 15—20.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Ueda Y., Enomoto T., Miyatake T. et al. Postpartum Outcome of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in pregnant women determined by route of delivery // Reprod. Sci. — 2009. — Vol. 16, № 11. — P. 1034—1039.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
