2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of delivery route on natural history of cervical dysplasia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
14
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
2
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar findings with respect to impact of mode of delivery on regression rates were also published by Kaneshiro et al 10 …”
Section: Natural History Of Cervical Dysplasia In Pregnancysupporting
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar findings with respect to impact of mode of delivery on regression rates were also published by Kaneshiro et al 10 …”
Section: Natural History Of Cervical Dysplasia In Pregnancysupporting
confidence: 87%
“…[6][7][8] Whether the mode of delivery (vaginal birth vs. cesarean section) is associated with regression rate remains controversial. 3,6,[8][9][10] Two publications reported reduction in cervical cancer risk with cesarean delivery, whereas other studies found higher regression rate with vaginal delivery or no difference with respect to mode of delivery at all. Ahdoot et al 8 published a series of 138 pregnant women with antepartum abnormal cervical cytology and their postpartum Papanicolaou smear with respect to mode of delivery.…”
Section: Natural History Of Cervical Dysplasia In Pregnancymentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Previous studies identified higher regression rates of HPV-related lesions among women who delivered vaginally compared to those who had Caesarean sections [43,44], in contrast to other studies, which found similar regression rates for women who had vaginal or c-section deliveries [45,46]. Ours is the first study to assess HPV clearance in the context of different modes of delivery, but our findings did not make evident any significant difference between them respecting HPV clearance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…The number of pregnant women presenting with abnormal cervical cytology has increased to approximately 5% of all pregnancies [1,2,3]. This increasing trend may be attributed to cervical cancer screening becoming an essential component of prenatal care as well as to the fact that the peak incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and childbirth coincide within the third decade of life [4,5,6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Vlahos et al [10] had explained their high regression rate of CIN with traumatic alterations of the cervical epithelium occurring at the time of delivery and rapid postpartum healing which may have led to an altered epithelial architecture secondary to surface repair of ulcerated, lacerated, or bruised tissues. Also, as in the study of Kaneshiro et al [3], cervical trauma and immunologic responses after vaginal delivery are assumed to result in regression of dysplastic lesions in postpartum patients. While the incidence of CIN in pregnant women is the same as that of nonpregnant women [2,5,11,12], Serati et al [13] in their study on the evolution of CIN in pregnant women presented that the spontaneous regression rate of CIN 1 was higher in pregnant compared to non-pregnant women.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%