COMPARISON OF CERVICAL BIOPSY USING PUNCH BIOPSY FORCEPS VERSUS LOOP ELECTRODE

Main Article Content

Renu Arora
Aarzoo Malik
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9361-8771
Vijay Zutshi
Sumitra Bachani

Abstract

Context: The biopsy of cervix can be obtained by various methods with availability of newer modalities like loop electrode. Objectives: To compare the histo-pathological parameters and clinical outcome of cervical biopsy obtained using punch biopsy forceps versus loop electrode. Methods: Women attending OPD were screened for cervical pathology, and colposcopy was done for those who screened positive. Patients who required cervical biopsy after colposcopy were allocated into 2 group; one undergoing LEEP biopsy and other half biopsied with Punch forceps. During procedure patients were evaluated for the intra-op pain and bleeding and their severity. The histo- pathological diagnosis was carried out and the sample was studied for its size, adequacy, and presence of any thermal or crush artefacts. Result: The two methods of biopsy were comparable in intra-op parameters, except for the increased requirement for additional haemostasis in LEEP biopsy. There was no case of bleeding from biopsy site at the follow-up visit. LEEP biopsy was  associated with continued vaginal discharge more often than punch biopsy. An adequate sample for histopathological diagnosis was obtained in 91.25% of all cases.  The comparative findings were reflective of comparable efficacy of both methods in providing an acceptable tissue sample for diagnosis. Conclusion: After analysing and comparing the aforementioned parameters, we opined that neither method can be deemed clearly superior to the other as a cervical biopsy procedure.


Keywords: Punch biopsy forceps; Loop electrode; Cervical biopsy.

Article Details

How to Cite
Arora, R., Malik, A., Zutshi, V., & Bachani, S. (2018). COMPARISON OF CERVICAL BIOPSY USING PUNCH BIOPSY FORCEPS VERSUS LOOP ELECTRODE. International Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Research, 4(4), 6-12. https://doi.org/10.31878/ijcbr.2018.44.02