Evaluation of the 5-year review of negative cervical smears in patients with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 7-11

  Tabbara, Sana O ^a,b   Sidawy, Mary K ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical cytology; High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion; Quality assurance; Smear review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; UNITED STATES; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0029991611     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0339(199607)15:1<7::AID-DC3>3.0.CO;2-H     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. Rules and Regulations. Federal Register 1992;57:7137-7186.
2. Allen KA, Zaleski S, Cohen MB. Review of negative Papanicolaou tests. Is the retrospective 5-year review necessary? Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:19-21.
3. Koss LG. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 1989;261:737-743.
4. Pairwuti S. False-negative Papanicolaou smears from women with cancerous and precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol 1991;35:40-46.
5. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR. False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 1985;29:1043-1046.
6. Hatem F, Wilbur D. High-grade cervical lesions following negative Papanicolaou smears: false-negative or rapid progression? Diagn Cytopathol 1995;12:135-141.
7. Sherman ME, Kelly D. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma following the report of three negative Papanicolaou smears: screening failures or rapid progression? Mod Pathol 1992;5:337-342.
8. Tabbara SO, Sidawy MK. Evaluation of the 10% rescreen of negative gynecologic smears as a quality assurance measure. Diagn Cytopathol 1996;14:84-86.
9. Faraker CA. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening. Cytopathology 1993;4:47-50.