Surgical Treatment of Usual Type Vulvar Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Study at Three Academic Hospitals
Gu Yu,Zhu Lan,Li Xiaochuan,Jin Hangmei,Wang Changyu,Lang Jinghe
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20131816
IF: 6.133
2014-01-01
Chinese Medical Journal
Abstract:Vulvar intraepithelial neoplasia (VIN) is a relatively uncommon disease that includes all of the precancerous lesions of vulvar malignancies with an incidence of approximately 2.5 per 100 000 women. In 2004, the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Diseases (ISSVD) abolished the old VIN grading system and introduced a two-tier classification for squamous VIN: the usual type and the differentiated type; the term VIN applied only to histologically "high-grade" squamous lesions (old terms VIN 2 and VIN 3).1 The two types of VIN differ in etiology, morphology, biology, clinical features and malignant potential. The usual type VIN (uVIN), which is associated with HPV infection, is the most common subtype, accounting for more than 80% of all VIN cases. Currently, the old 3-grade system of the VIN terminology is still used in most of the hospitals in China. In this presentation, we categorized the patients with the ISSVD 2004 classification standard and attempted to describe the clinical features and the outcome of surgical treatment of uVIN using the retrospective data from three academic hospitals in China. METHODS The retrospective study was exempt from informed medical consent requirements and approved by the Review Broad at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH). The consecutive case series were retrieved from the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at three academic hospitals in China and includes all women with histologically diagnosed VIN between September, 2002 and September, 2010. The three hospitals were Peking Union Medical College Hospital in Beijing, Women's Hospital of Zhejiang University in Hangzhou and Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College in Wuhan. All of the specimen slides were reviewed by experienced pathologists using consistent histological criteria and were categorized according to the ISSVD 2004 classification standard. A total of 64 patients who underwent surgical treatments with confirmed postoperative pathological diagnosis of uVIN were collected; 9 patients were excluded, including 6 patients with early invasive squamous cell carcinoma arising in VIN lesions and 3 patients who were previously diagnosed with VIN1. The medical history of the 64 uVIN patients were carefully reviewed, including their age, gravidity and parity history, course of the disease, lesion location, operative method, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pathological diagnosis results. The high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) infection status of the vulvar lesions were detected with Hybrid Capture II HPV testing. Fifty-five patients were followed up by telephone or with an outpatient clinic visit. By the end of the follow-up period in July, 2010, the lost to follow-up rate was 14.1% (9/64). All analyses were performed using the appropriate statistical tests with SPSS 18.0 software (SPSS Inc., USA). The t-test was used for the comparison between the two groups of quantitative data with a normal distribution. The quantitative data that did not follow a normal distribution were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis rank test. The qualitative data were compared with Fisher's exact test. The P-values presented are two-tailed, and the results were statistically significant at P<0.05. RESULTS Patient characteristics All the patients were Chinese. The mean age at diagnosis was (40.6±12.5) years (median, 39 years; range, 13-65 years). The average gravidity was (2.3±1.3) (median, 3; range, 0-5), and the average parity was 1.1±0.9 (median, 1; range, 0-4). The median duration of symptoms was 12 months (range, 0.5-360 months). In 64.1% (41/64) of the patients, the lesions were multifocal. A high proportion (68.8%, 22/32) of patients was positive for hrHPV infection in the vulvar lesions before biopsy. All of the patients underwent an initial excisional treatment. Of the 64 patients, 55 were available for follow-up. The average duration of follow-up was (8.6±7.5) months (range, 1-43 months), and 74.5% (41/55) of the uVIN cases were followed up for longer than 6 months. There were four cases of recurrence during follow-up. Efficacy of surgical treatment In this study, the initial treatment modality for all 64 patients was surgical excision including wide local excision and simple vulvectomy. The cases were divided into two groups according to the surgical method. There is no significant difference in the patients' age, gravidity, parity and the disease duration between the two groups. Of the 12 cases involving simple vulvectomy, 100% had multifocal lesions, while a smaller proportion of 55.8% of the patients who underwent wide local excision had multifocal lesions (P<0.05). In the cases involving simple vulvectomy, the median margin size was 10 mm, while a smaller median margin size of 5 mm was observed in the cases involving wide local excision (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the rates of positive margins in the two groups; moreover, no significant difference was observed in the recurrence rates between the two groups. A shorter median operative time and a lower median amount of intraoperative blood loss were observed in the wide local excision group compared with the simple vulvectomy group (Table 1).Table 1: Clinical characteristics of the patients according to the operative methodThe relevance of the three following clinical factors to the clinical prognosis was evaluated with Fisher's exact test or Kruskal-Wallis test: multifocal lesions, the margin size and the positive margins. Although all four recurrent cases had multifocal lesions, there was no significant correlation between multifocal lesions and recurrence. No significant correlation was found between disease recurrence and positive margins or disease recurrence and the margin size (Table 2).Table 2: Relationship between prognosis and possible clinical factorsDISCUSSION The incidence of VIN is relatively low, and the clinical features and biological behavior of the disease are not clear; in addition, there is no consensus on the optimum treatment methods. Now the most common treatment for uVIN is still surgical excision. There are no definitive recommendations about which surgical method is most appropriate for uVIN treatment. In this study, the patients were treated with wide local excision or simple vulvectomy. The wide local excision group had a smaller proportion of patients with multifocal lesions than simple vulvectomy group, and there was no significant difference in other general clinical features between the two groups. The median margin size in the wide local excision group was less than that in the simple vulvectomy group (5 mm vs. 10 mm, P<0.05). Although no definitive studies have evaluated the margin size in the treatment of uVIN, it is generally accepted that a peripheral margin of 5 mm is adequate for uVIN surgery,2 which is consistent with our observation that there was no significant difference in the rate of negative margins between the wide local excision group and the simple vulvectomy group, although the margin size was significantly increased with the simple vulvectomy procedure. The multicentricity of the uVIN lesions might help explain the contradiction. In this study, the results showed that there was no significant difference in the recurrence rates between the two different surgical method groups. With a low total recurrence rate of 6.07%, it was verified that surgical treatment was effective for uVIN patients. However, compared with wide local excision, simple vulvectomy results in severe genital disfigurement, longer operative durations and increased intraoperative hemorrhaging; therefore, simple vulvectomy is most commonly utilized in elderly patients with extensive vulvar involvement because occult invasive disease may be present. Based on the results of this study, wide local excision should be preferentially considered in treating uVIN patients, even in patients with multifocal lesions. The risk factors associated with recurrence after surgical treatment have been popular issues in VIN studies in recent years, and various risk factors have been considered to be associated with an increased risk of recurrence. Based on surgical principles, recurrence is more likely to occur when a lesion is incompletely excised. However, the significance of surgical margins in VIN patients has been debated in a number of studies with conflicting conclusions.3,4 Several studies have demonstrated an increased risk of recurrence in multifocal VIN.4,5 Based on our observations, neither positive surgical margins nor the multicentricity of uVIN lesions was found to be correlated with recurrence; in addition, the margin size was not correlated with recurrence. We thought that there were several reasons to explain why there was no significant correlation between recurrence with all these three factors. Firstly, it might be caused by the unobservable subclinical VIN lesions in the patients with a clinically visible monofocal lesion. Secondly, spontaneous regression of VIN lesions had been reported in young women. Furthermore, the relatively small number of patients and the racially homogenous patient population might also be the possible reasons. In conclusion, for the foreseeable future, surgical treatment will remain the basis of uVIN management, particularly in cases involving extensive disease or the possibility of invasion. According to our results, wide local excision and simple vulvectomy are both effective for uVIN treatment, and patients who underwent wide local excision had less intraoperative hemorrhaging and shorter operative times. Given that simple vulvectomy is associated with the disadvantage of severe disruption of vulvar anatomy and function, wide local excision should be still regarded as the first option in patients with uVIN disease. Regardless of the surgical method, long-term follow-up after surgery is necessary.