Skip to main content

Abstract

Conization of the uterine cervix was first described by Lisfranc in 1815 and the techniques, indications, and adjunctive procedures have been modified significantly since that time. Simms, in 1861, sutured the cervix, and Sturmdorf, in 1916, described his inverting suture.8 The use of the cryostat for rapid diagnosis in conization specimens was popularized by Rutledge and Ibanez6 and conization was most frequently used for diagnosis of abnormal cervical cytological specimens during the late 1960s. However, many of the previous indications for conization have been supplemented by new procedures made available by technological advancement. Conization is rarely indicated for the repair of cervical lacerations, and cryosurgery has replaced it in the management of symptomatic chronic cervicitis. Likewise, colposcopy with directed biopsy has reduced the number of conizations performed in the investigation of abnormal cervical cytologies by 90% in most gynecology-oncology services today.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bjerre, B., Gosta, E., Folke, L., et al.: Conization as only treatment of carcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 125:143–152, 1976.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Claman, A.D., and Lee, N.: Factors that relate to complications of cone biopsy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 120:124–128, 1974.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ortiz, R., and Newton, M.: Colposcopy in the management of abnormal cervical smears in pregnancy. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 109:46–49, 1971.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rubio, C.A., and Thomassen, P.: A critical evaluation of the Schiller test in patients before conization. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 125:96–99, 1976.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rubio, C.A., Thomassen, P., and Kock, Y.: Influence of the size of cone specimens on postoperative hemorrhage. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 122:939–944, 1975.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rutledge, F., and Ibanez, M.L.: Use of the cryostat in gynecologic surgery. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 83:1208–1213, 1962.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Selim, M.A., So-Bosita, J.L., Blair, O.M., et al.: Cervical biopsy versus conization. Obstet. Gynecol. 41:177–182, 1973.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. van Nagell, J.R., Parker, J.C., Hicks, L.P., et al.: Diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy of cervical conization. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 124:134–139, 1976.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Villa Santa, U.: Hemostatic “Cerclage” after knife conization of the cervix. Obstet. Gynecol. 42:299–301, 1973.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Masterson, B.J. (1997). Cervical Conization. In: Manual of Gynecologic Surgery. Comprehensive Manuals of Surgical Specialties. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-0073-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-0073-1_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-0075-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-0073-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics