[Biological validity, cytodiagnosis, and therapy of cervix dysplasia].
KLAUS EBELING, K Kühndel, Karl Bilek
Abstract
KLAUS EBELING, K Kühndel, Karl Bilek
Abstract
Certain forms of dysplasia are biologically equal to carcinoma in situ and should be treated alike. The persistance of the state during the permanent cytologic control is to be regarded as criterion for the treatment of middle and even the slight dysplasia. Slides of cells indicating a dysplasia are therefore placed in a cytologic risk-group III D. If the restoration of the cytologic state cannot be observed within 12 months, the conisation as carcinoma prophylaxis of slight and middle forms of dysplasia should be performed.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Certain forms of dysplasia are biologically equal to carcinoma in situ and should be treated alike. The persistance of the state during the permanent cytologic control is to be regarded as criterion for the treatment of middle and even the slight dysplasia. Slides of cells indicating a dysplasia are therefore placed in a cytologic risk-group III D. If the restoration of the cytologic state cannot be observed within 12 months, the conisation as carcinoma prophylaxis of slight and middle forms of dysplasia should be performed.
Key concepts: Medicine, Dysplasia, Carcinoma in situ, Cytology, Cervix, Carcinoma, Gynecology, Uterine cervix