Surveillance patterns of cervical cancer patients treated with conization alone

Abstract

ObjectivesTo determine surveillance patterns of stage I cervical cancer after cervical conization.MethodsA 25-question electronic survey was sent to members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Provider demographics, surveillance during year 1, years 1–3, and >3 years after cervical conization, use of pelvic examination, cytology, Human papillomavirus testing, colposcopy, and endocervical curettage were queried. Data were analyzed.Results239/1175 (20.1%) responses were collected over a 5-week study period. All providers identified as gynecologic oncologists. During year 1, 66.7% of providers perform pelvic examination and 37.1% perform cytology every 3 months. During years 1–3, 61.6% perform pelvic examination and 46% perform cytology every 6 months. At >3 years, 54.4% perform pelvic examination every 6 months and 43% perform annual pelvic examination. 66.7% of respondents perform cytology annually, and 51.9% perform annual Human papilloma virus testing. 85% of providers do not offer routine colposcopy and 60% do not offer endocervical curettage at any point during 5-year follow-up. 76.3% of respondents screen patients for Human papilloma virus vaccination.ConclusionsTo date, there are no specific surveillance guidelines for patients with stage I cervical cancer treated with cervical conization. The most common surveillance practice reported is pelvic examination with or without cytology every 3 months in year 1 and every 6 months thereafter. However, wide variation exists in visit frequency, cytology, and Human papillomavirus testing, and there is a clear trend away from using colposcopy and endocervical curettage. These disparate surveillance practices indicate a need for well-defined, uniform surveillance guidelines.