Comparison of LLETZ Versus LEEP for the Treatment of Cervical Dysplasia
NCT ID: NCT04772937
Last Updated: 2025-01-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
NA
206 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-06-07
2025-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The primary objective of the present study is to compare LLETZ (resection of the dysplastic lesion including the transformation zone) with targeted resection of the colposcopically conspicuous lesion only (LEEP) and to compare it with regard to oncological safety (defined as non-in-sano rate).
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
LLETZ Under Direct Colposcopic Vision
NCT02910388
Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ) with Vs Without IntraOperative Application of Lugol's Iodine
NCT05132114
Validation of Implementation of Cervical Dysplasia Treatment Modalities in HIV-Seropositive Women
NCT01723956
Optimal Timing for Performing Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure
NCT03952975
Sexual Function and Quality of Life After LEEP: a Prospective Multi-Center Study
NCT06078514
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
In practice, there are four different methods by which conization can be performed: Knife Conization, Laser Conization, Large Loop Excision of the Transformation Zone (LLETZ) and Loop Electrical Excision Procedure (LEEP). The first three methods have in common that they aim to remove the entire transformation zone. The rationale for this is that both the precancerous lesions and the cervical carcinoma itself originate in the transformation zone of the cervix. This thesis would support the idea of resecting the lesion while taking the remaining healthy transformation zone along as a precaution. However, it is clear that with the removal of the entire transformation zone, healthy tissue is removed in addition to the lesion itself. Any increase in radicality may increase the complication rate of the procedure, especially with regard to the most feared long-term complication of preterm birth, because the more cervical tissue is removed, the higher the risk of subsequent preterm birth. This connection speaks in favor of the use of LEEP, in which only the visible dysplastic tissue in healthy tissue is removed in the sense of a radical resection, without at the same time also removing the entire transformation zone, especially in women who still wish to have children.
In summary, the aim of conization is on the one hand to achieve a high level of oncological safety (low recurrence rate, high R0 resection rate) by resecting sufficient dysplastic tissue, and on the other hand to avoid excessive tissue resection, because this would increase the risk of premature birth in a subsequent pregnancy.
There is no direct head-to-head comparison between LEEP and LLETZ in the literature regarding oncologic safety, for which complete resection of the dysplastic lesion (so-called 'in-sano resection') is the most appropriate postoperative surrogate parameter. In a Pubmed literature search (search date: February 10, 2021, search terms: conization, LEEP, LLETZ, resection margin, randomized), no prospective randomized study on this topic was found. Further clinical studies are therefore useful to optimize surgical therapy for cervical dysplasia
The primary objective of the present study is to compare LLETZ (resection of the dysplastic lesion including the transformation zone) with targeted resection of the colposcopically conspicuous lesion only (LEEP) and to compare it with regard to oncological safety (defined as non-in-sano rate).
For this purpose, patients with histologically confirmed CIN II/III will be randomly assigned to one of the two surgical methods. In order to exclude an unwanted influence by unconsciously different behavior of the patients, the patient will only learn about the surgical method performed on her after the control examination 6 months postoperatively (unilateral blinding). The surgeon is not blinded for obvious technical reasons. However, in case of complications, access to the surgical report and the chosen method is possible at any time.
Immediately postoperatively, the specimen is examined histologically and evaluated with regard to the depth of the conus and the degree of dysplasia as well as the resection margins (R0= free resection margin; R1= dysplasia extends to the resection margin) by a pathology specialist.
After an interval of 6-8 months, the first follow-up examination (the so-called "test of cure") with PAP smear and HPV test is performed in accordance with the guidelines. The two groups are compared with regard to normalization of the Pap smear, HPV status and colposcopic findings (including histology in the case of colposcopic abnormalities).
For patients with negative HPV test, unremarkable cytology, histology and colposcopy, the study is terminated. These patients are considered cured and discharged to regular screening with their established gynecologist. In case of abnormalities, the further procedure is determined according to the usual clinical criteria in conformity with the guidelines: clinical control after 3 and/or 6 months or re-conization.
Secondary target criteria of the study are, in addition to the intra- and postoperative complication rate, the pain perception of the patients and the intraoperative blood loss, also the rate of negative high risk HPV tests after 6-8 months, since a negative HPV test is generally regarded as evidence of successful treatment. Thus, the negative predictive value for a negative HPV test after conization ranges from 92% to 100%. Successful therapy usually results in elimination of the HP virus. Accordingly, a negative HPV test excludes CIN persistence or recurrence with a high probability. In contrast, a persistently positive HPV test may be taken as an indication of persistence of dysplasia or as an indicator of recurrent dysplasia.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
LLETZ group
LLETZ (large loop excision of the transformation zone) is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia.
LLETZ
LLETZ is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia. The transformation zone of the cervix is completely removed
LEEP group
LEEP (loop electrosurgical excision procedure) is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia.
LEEP
LEEP is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia. Only the dysplastic lesion is removed without removing the whole transformation zone.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
LLETZ
LLETZ is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia. The transformation zone of the cervix is completely removed
LEEP
LEEP is one of several possible surgical interventions for treating cervical dysplasia. Only the dysplastic lesion is removed without removing the whole transformation zone.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Colposcopically visible lesion
* No therapy of the disease so far
Exclusion Criteria
* Taking immunosuppressive drugs (incl. glucocorticoids)
* Known HIV positivity
* Malignant disease requiring treatment
* Unsatisfactory colposcopy
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ruhr University of Bochum
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Clemens Tempfer
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Clemens B Tempfer, MD, MBA
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Ruhr-Universität Bochum / Marien Hospital Herne
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Dept. OBGYN Ruhr University Bochum
Herne, , Germany
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Martin-Hirsch PP, Paraskevaidis E, Bryant A, Dickinson HO. Surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 4;2013(12):CD001318. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001318.pub3.
Chua KL, Hjerpe A. Human papillomavirus analysis as a prognostic marker following conization of the cervix uteri. Gynecol Oncol. 1997 Jul;66(1):108-13. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1997.4753.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
LLETZ-2
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.