Skip to main content
MedVellum
QuestionsVideosPricing

MedVellum

Fellowship exam preparation across every specialty: source-verified topics, questions in every format, and videos.

Product

  • Specialties
  • Questions
  • Videos
  • Exam tools
  • Pricing

Verification & policy

  • Verified register
  • Editorial policy
  • Privacy
  • Terms

Account

  • Sign in
  • Create account
  • Dashboard
  • Account & billing

© 2026 MedVellum. For education only — not a substitute for clinical judgement.

llms.txtPsychiatry LLM catalogSitemap

O&G SAQsGynaecological oncology — premalignant cervical disease

O&G SAQs · Gynaecological oncology — premalignant cervical disease

Colposcopy and treatment of CIN/CGIN — structured SAQ (15 marks)

FRANZCOG-format structured SAQ on colposcopy of a high-grade squamous lesion: the structured colposcopic assessment, the ablation-versus-excision decision, the obstetric outcomes of excision (Kyrgiou, Athanasiou), and the management of glandular cytology (Nikolopoulos). Per-sub-part marking rubric included.

15 marks20 min3 min readVerification in progress

Target exams

FRANZCOGMRCOGABOG
On this page
Study tools

Target exams

FRANZCOGMRCOGABOG
Prompt
You are the gynaecology registrar running colposcopy clinic. A 31-year-old woman, G1P1, is referred with an HPV-positive cervical screening test and a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) on cytology. She wants further children. Colposcopy shows a dense acetowhite lesion with abnormal vessels occupying about half the ectocervix; the squamocolumnar junction is fully visible. (a) Outline your structured colposcopic assessment and the information you must record. (3 marks) (b) State your management decision here, and the principle that determines whether a lesion can be managed by ablation rather than excision. (4 marks) (c) She consents to LLETZ. Describe the obstetric outcomes of excision of the transformation zone that you must disclose at consent, with the relative risks. (4 marks) (d) Her friend, aged 45, is referred with possible glandular neoplasia of endocervical type on cytology but a normal-looking colposcopy. Outline the management and justify it. (4 marks)

How this SAQ is marked

Marks come from specifics: the recorded colposcopy findings, the ablation-versus-excision principle, the named obstetric outcomes with their relative risks, and the correct handling of glandular cytology. Write in short labelled points. [3]

Reveal model answer and mark schemeShowHide

(a) Structured colposcopic assessment and recorded information (3 marks)

Up to one mark per point, maximum three. [4]

  • Magnified assessment of the transformation zone after acetic acid; state that most cervical cancers develop in the transformation zone, so seeing the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ) is the first question.[4]
  • Record the transformation zone type using the IFCPC 2011 terminology — here the SCJ is fully visible (type 1 or 2), making colposcopy satisfactory.[4]
  • Record the lesion — site, size, and the worst colposcopic feature (here dense acetowhite with abnormal vessels) — and obtain a directed biopsy before any destructive treatment, because histology is the standard.[3]

(b) Management decision and the ablation-vs-excision principle (4 marks)

One mark for the decision with rationale; up to three for the eligibility principle and its components. [3]

  • Decision: with biopsy-confirmed high-grade CIN and a fully visible lesion and SCJ, excision (LLETZ) is appropriate here; ablation would also be eligible but she consents to LLETZ which gives histology.[3]
  • The eligibility principle for ablation: ablation is acceptable only when the entire lesion is visible on the ectocervix, the SCJ is fully seen (transformation zone type 1 or 2), there is no suspicion of invasion, there is no glandular disease, and cytology and colposcopy are concordant with a biopsy that excludes invasion.[3][4]
  • Contraindication to ablation: a type 3 zone (SCJ not fully seen) means lesions in the endocervical canal may be missed and ablation risks undertreatment — excise instead.[4]
  • Never ablate glandular disease (CGIN/AIS) — excision is essential.[5]

(c) Obstetric outcomes of excision to disclose at consent (4 marks)

One mark per correctly named outcome with its relative risk, maximum four. [1]

  • Preterm delivery (under 37 weeks) — cold-knife conisation RR 2.59; LLETZ RR 1.70.[1]
  • Low birthweight (under 2500 g) — conisation 2.53; LLETZ 1.82.[1]
  • Premature rupture of the membranes — LLETZ RR 2.69.[1]
  • Caesarean section — cold-knife conisation RR 3.17; and the Athanasiou network meta-analysis confirms that more radical excisional techniques carry more preterm-birth risk, whereas ablative treatments probably do not increase preterm-birth risk.[2]

(d) Management of possible glandular neoplasia with normal colposcopy (4 marks)

One mark per point, maximum four. [5]

  • Excisional biopsy is essential — among women referred with possible glandular neoplasia of endocervical type on cytology, 85.4% had significant pathology (AIS, invasive cancer, or high-grade CIN).[5]
  • Colposcopic impression varies significantly for glandular disease, and AIS is a histological diagnosis — complete excision of the abnormal lesion should be achieved; ablation is never appropriate.[5]
  • Endocervical sampling is required when the SCJ is not seen or cytology is abnormal despite a normal-looking colposcopy; even with normal colposcopy, CIN 2/3 or AIS may be found in about 16% on endocervical curettage.[7]
  • Residual disease risk after AIS excision is high even with clear margins (about 32% in one series), so close surveillance follows fertility-sparing cone, and hysterectomy is recommended once fertility is no longer desired.[6]
Obstetrics & Gynaecology Pro

Continue reading

You have read the opening of this SAQ. The complete unit — every section and its primary-source references — is part of the Obstetrics & Gynaecology fellowship library.

Sign in to continueSee pricing
References7ShowHide
  1. [1]Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M, Prendiville W, Paraskevaidis E Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis Lancet, 2006.PMID 16473126
  2. [2]Athanasiou A, Veroniki AA, Efthimiou O, Kalliala I, Naci H, Bowden S, et al. Comparative effectiveness and risk of preterm birth of local treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and stage IA1 cervical cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis Lancet Oncol, 2022.PMID 35835138
  3. [3]Martin-Hirsch PP, Paraskevaidis E, Bryant A, Dickinson HO Surgery for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013.PMID 24302546
  4. [4]Effah K, Tekpor E, Wormenor CM, Essel NOM Transformation zone types: a call for review of the IFCPC terminology to embrace practice in low-resource settings Ecancermedicalscience, 2023.PMID 38414959
  5. [5]Nikolopoulos M, Athanasias P, Godfrey MAL, Nikolopoulos K, Maheshwari MK Cervical glandular neoplasia referrals and the diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ: Correlating cytology, colposcopy findings, and clinical outcomes Cytopathology, 2021.PMID 34181788
  6. [6]Bell SG, Peng K, Kobernik EK, Miller ME, Lieberman R, Saunders NA, et al. Fertility and Pregnancy Outcomes After Conservative Management of Adenocarcinoma In Situ of the Cervix J Low Genit Tract Dis, 2021.PMID 34369435
  7. [7]Behrens AS, Dietl AK, Adler W, Geppert C, Hartmann A, Knöll A, et al. Evaluation of endocervical curettage (ECC) in colposcopy for detecting cervical intraepithelial lesions Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2024.PMID 39472340
Obstetrics & Gynaecology Pro

$29/ monthor $279 / year

The complete Obstetrics & Gynaecology library, every exam format, one subscription.

  • Complete library for one chosen specialty
  • Timed MCQ mock exams and spaced review
  • Clinical cases & cross-table vivas
See pricingSign in
PreviousClinical governance — structured SAQ (15 marks)Professional practice — clinical governance, quality and patient safetyNextConsent and provision of information — structured SAQ (15 marks)Perioperative care — medico-legal