Cervical Colposcopy: Indications and Risk Assessment

 

Am Fam Physician. 2020 Jul 1;102(1):39-48.

  Patient information: A handout on this topic is available at https://familydoctor.org/colposcopy/.

Author disclosure: No relevant financial affiliations.

The practice of colposcopy, a diagnostic procedure to evaluate for vaginal, vulvar, and cervical dysplasia, has evolved to incorporate patient risk factors for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cancer. Changes in cervical cancer screening and guidelines, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination recommendations, and colposcopy standards from the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) have implications for all primary care clinicians, not only those who perform colposcopies. Primary care clinicians should offer HPV vaccination to all patients between the ages of nine and 26, in addition to cervical cancer screening and follow-up guidance. Primary care clinicians should recognize the degrees of risk of high-grade CIN and cancer conferred by cytology, HPV subtype, and persistence of HPV infection. Clinicians should address modifiable risk factors such as tobacco use, and provide counseling to patients about colposcopy based on their individual risks. Clinicians should conduct shared decision-making about immediate loop electrosurgical excision procedure vs. colposcopy with multiple biopsies and endocervical sampling for patients with the highest risk of cervical cancer, and for patients who are older than 25 years with at least two of the following: HPV-16, HPV-18, and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology. Primary care clinicians should be familiar with the 2019 ASCCP guidelines and develop clinic-based systems to ensure appropriate follow-up of abnormal cytology, positive high-risk HPV testing, diagnosed CIN, and cervical cancer. Patients with an abnormal cervical cancer screening history require surveillance, which differs from routine screening for patients with normal prior screening results. Long-term surveillance is recommended for patients with CIN 2 or worse.

Three recent developments show promise to reduce cervical cancer incidence in the United States. In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a two-dose series of the 9-valent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for children aged nine to 14.1 For patients aged 15 to 26, a three-dose series is recommended.2 Educating families about two-dose HPV vaccination should lead to improved vaccine initiation rates and the shorter series should improve vaccine completion rates. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force endorsed HPV-only cervical cancer screening every five years for women 30 and older as an alternative to screening with cytology every three years or cotesting with cytology and HPV every five years.3 HPV self-sampling accuracy is similar to traditional office-based clinician sampling, and it has the potential to improve access to cervical cancer screening.4 Lastly, in 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded its approval of the three-dose 9-valent HPV vaccine to people between the ages of 27 and 45. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends shared clinical decision-making for patients in this age group who are not vaccinated or who are undervaccinated who might benefit from HPV vaccination.5 Because older patients are less likely to clear high-risk HPV infections,5 this could decrease cervical cancer incidence.

WHAT IS NEW ON THIS TOPIC

Colposcopy

Recommendations from the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology 2019 guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors are based on risk, not results.

The American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology 2017 consensus recommendations for colposcopy practice incorporate a patient's risk factors for high-grade CIN 2 or worse into decision-making about tissue sampling.

Long-term follow-up in a Swedish study of women older than 30 years uncovered no patients with CIN 2 or worse who cleared their high-risk HPV infections and a 100% progression to CIN 2 or worse over 13 years when high-risk HPV persisted.

A high-quality study of 47,000 women undergoing colposcopy found that a random biopsy in the setting of a normal colposcopic impression diagnosed 21% of the total CIN 2 and 19% of CIN 3 or worse, primarily in patients with HPV-16 and HPV-18.

CIN = cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; HPV = human papillomavirus.

The Authors

show all author info

JESSICA VALLS BURNESS, MD, is the associate program director of Providence Oregon Family Medicine at Providence Milwaukie Hospital, Milwaukie....

JILLIAN MARIE SCHROEDER, MD, is a family physician at Mosaic Medical, Bend, Ore.

JOHANNA B. WARREN, MD, is the associate director of the Center for Women's Health, division head of primary care at the Center for Women's Health, and an associate professor in the Departments of Family Medicine and Obstetrics and Gynecology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.

Address correspondence to Jessica Valls Burness, MD, Providence Oregon Family Medicine, 10330 SE 32nd Ave., Ste. 205, Milwaukie, OR 97222 (email: jessica.burness@providence.org). Reprints are not available from the authors.

Author disclosure: No relevant financial affiliations.

References

show all references

1. Meites E, Kempe A, Markowitz LE. Use of a 2-dose schedule for human papillomavirus vaccination – updated recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(49):1405–1408....

2. Meites E, Szilagyi PG, Chesson HW, et al. Human papillomavirus vaccination for adults: updated recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68(32):698–702.

3. Kim JJ, Burger EA, Regan C, et al. Screening for cervical cancer in primary care; a decision analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2018;320(7):706–714.

4. Polman NJ, Ebisch RMF, Heideman DAM, et al. Performance of human papillomavirus testing on self-collected versus clinician-collected samples for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse: a randomised, paired screen-positive, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(2):229–238.

5. Rodríguez AC, Schiffman M, Herrero R, et al. Longitudinal study of human papillomavirus persistence and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2/3: critical role of duration of infection. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(5):315–324.

6. Smith HO, Tiffany MF, Qualls CR, et al. The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States—a 24-year population-based study. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;78(2):97–105.

7. Wang SS, Sherman ME, Hildesheim A, et al. Cervical adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma incidence trends among white women and black women in the United States for 1976–2000. Cancer. 2004;100(5):1035–1044.

8. Herzog TJ, Monk BJ. Reducing the burden of glandular carcinomas of the uterine cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(6):566–571.

9. American Academy of Family Physicians. Colposcopy (Position Paper). Accessed April 28, 2019. https://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/colposcopy.html

10. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, et al. 2012 ASCCP Consensus Guidelines Conference. 2012 updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors [published correction appears in J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17(3):367]. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17(5 suppl 1):S1–S27.

11. Perkins RB, Guido RS, Castle PE, et al. 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24(2):102–131.

12. Schlecht NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J, et al. Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA. 2001;286(24):3106–3114.

13. Khan MJ, Castle PE, Lorincz AT, et al. The elevated 10-year risk of cervical precancer and cancer in women with human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 or 18 and the possible utility of type-specific HPV testing in clinical practice. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(14):1072–1079.

14. Castle PE, Fetterman B, Poitras N, et al. Relationship of atypical glandular cell cytology, age, and human papillomavirus detection to cervical and endometrial cancer risks. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(2 pt 1):243–248.

15. Castle PE, Fetterman B, Thomas Cox J, et al. The age-specific relationships of abnormal cytology and human papillomavirus DNA results to the risk of cervical precancer and cancer [published correction appears in Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(3):775–777]. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):76–84.

16. Appleby P, Beral V, Berrington de González A, et al.; International Collaboration of Epidemiological Studies of Cervical Cancer. Carcinoma of the cervix and tobacco smoking: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 13,541 women with carcinoma of the cervix and 23,017 women without carcinoma of the cervix from 23 epidemiological studies. Int J Cancer. 2006;118(6):1481–1495.

17. Wentzensen N, Massad LS, Mayeaux EJ Jr, et al. Evidence-based consensus recommendations for colposcopy practice for cervical cancer prevention in the United States. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017;21(4):216–222.

18. Silver MI, Andrews J, Cooper CK, et al. Risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or worse by cytology, human papillomavirus 16/18, and colposcopy impression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(3):725–735.

19. Wentzensen N, Schiffman M, Silver MI, et al. ASCCP colposcopy standards: risk-based colposcopy practice. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017;21(4):230–234.

20. Ebisch RM, Rovers MM, Bosgraaf RP, et al. Evidence supporting see-and-treat management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2016;123(1):59–66.

21. Wentzensen N, Walker JL, Gold MA, et al. Multiple biopsies and detection of cervical cancer precursors at colposcopy. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(1):83–89.

22. Elfgren K, Elfström KM, Naucler P, et al. Management of women with human papillomavirus persistence: long-term follow-up of a randomized clinical trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):264.e1–264.e7.

23. Egeman D, Cheung LC, Chen X, et al. Risk estimates supporting the 2019 ASCCP risk-based management consensus guidelines. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2020;24(2):132–143.

24. Leyden WA, Manos MM, Geiger AM, et al. Cervical cancer in women with comprehensive health care access: attributable factors in the screening process. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(9):675–683.

25. Tainio K, Athanasiou A, Tikkinen KAO, et al. Clinical course of untreated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 under active surveillance: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018;360:k499.

26. Bottari F, Iacobone AD, Passerini R, et al. Human papillomavirus genotyping compared with a qualitative high-risk human papillomavirus test after treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134(3):452–462.

27. Giuliano AR, Sedjo RL, Roe DJ, et al. Clearance of oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) infection: effect of smoking (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2002;13(9):839–846.

28. Nguyen ML, Flowers L. Cervical cancer screening in immunocompromised women. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2013;40(2):339–357.

29. Waxman AG, Conageski C, Silver MI, et al. ASCCP colposcopy standards: how do we perform colposcopy? Implications for establishing standards. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017;21(4):235–241.

30. Gage JC, Hanson VW, Abbey K, et al.; ASCUS LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(2):264–272.

31. van der Marel J, van Baars R, Rodriguez A, et al. The increased detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia when using a second biopsy at colposcopy. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(2):201–207.

32. Diedrich JT, Felix JC, Lonky NM. Contribution of exocervical biopsy, endocervical curettage, and colposcopic grading in diagnosing high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2016;20(1):52–56.

33. Liu AH, Walker J, Gage JC, et al. Diagnosis of cervical precancers by endocervical curettage at colposcopy of women with abnormal cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(6):1218–1225.

34. Pretorius RG, Belinson JL, Burchette RJ, et al. Regardless of skill, performing more biopsies increases the sensitivity of colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2011;15(3):180–188.

35. Huh WK, Sideri M, Stoler M, et al. Relevance of random biopsy at the transformation zone when colposcopy is negative. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(4):670–678.

36. Klam S, Arseneau J, Mansour N, et al. Comparison of endocervical curettage and endocervical brushing. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(1):90–94.

37. Goksedef BP, Api M, Kaya O, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of two endocervical sampling method: randomized controlled trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013;287(1):117–122.

38. Khan MJ, Werner CL, Darragh TM, et al. ASCCP colposcopy standards: role of colposcopy, benefits, potential harms, and terminology for colposcopic practice. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017;21(4):223–229.

39. Slama J, Adamcova K, Dusek L, et al. Umbilication is a strong predictor of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17(3):303–307.

40. Reproductive Health Access Project website. Language in the exam room. Published November 13, 2013. Accessed November 25, 2018. https://www.reproductiveaccess.org/resource/contraceptive-pearl-language-in-the-exam-room/

41. O'Connor M, Gallagher P, Waller J, et al.; Irish Cervical Screening Research Consortium (CERVIVA). Adverse psychological outcomes following colposcopy and related procedures: a systematic review. BJOG. 2016;123(1):24–38.

42. Carwile JL, Feldman S, Johnson NR. Use of a simple visual distraction to reduce pain and anxiety in patients undergoing colposcopy. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2014;18(4):317–321.

43. Hilal Z, Alici F, Tempfer CB, et al. Video colposcopy for reducing patient anxiety during colposcopy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(2):411–419.

44. Church L, Oliver L, Dobie S, et al. Analgesia for colposcopy: double-masked, randomized comparison of ibuprofen and benzocaine gel. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(1):5–10.

45. Oyama IA, Wakabayashi MT, Frattarelli LC, et al. Local anesthetic reduces the pain of colposcopic biopsies: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188(5):1164–1165.

46. Schmid BC, Pils S, Heinze G, et al. Forced coughing versus local anesthesia and pain associated with cervical biopsy: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(6):641.e1–641.e3.

47. Apgar BS, Kaufman AJ, Bettcher C, et al. Gynecologic procedures: colposcopy, treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, and endometrial assessment. Am Fam Physician. 2013;87(12):836–843. https://www.aafp.org/afp/2013/0615/p836.html

 

 

Copyright © 2020 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.
This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. Contact afpserv@aafp.org for copyright questions and/or permission requests.

Want to use this article elsewhere? Get Permissions

CME Quiz

More in AFP


Editor's Collections


Related Content


More in Pubmed

MOST RECENT ISSUE


Aug 1, 2020

Access the latest issue of American Family Physician

Read the Issue


Email Alerts

Don't miss a single issue. Sign up for the free AFP email table of contents.

Sign Up Now

Navigate this Article