Cold-knife conization versus conization by the loop electrosurgical excision procedure: A randomized, prospective study

Objective: Our purpose was to compare the diagnostic ability and treatment efficacy of conization by the loop electrosurgical excision procedure with cold-knife conization. Study Design: One hundred eighty women who required conization for diagnosis and treatment of cervical dysplasia or microinvasive cervical carcinoma were prospectively enrolled in a randomized clinical trial to receive either cold-knife conization or conization by the loop electrosurgical excision procedure. Conization complications, rate of lesion clearance, and therapeutic outcome were assessed for the 2 study groups. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the complication rate ( P = 1.00), the rate of lesion clearance ( P = .18), or the rate of disease recurrence ( P = .13) between the 2 study groups. The mean follow-up was 11.2 months in the cold-knife conization group and 10.4 months in the loop-excision conization group. Conclusion: Cold-knife conization and loop-excision conization yield similar diagnostic and therapeutic results. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180:276-82.)