Cervex-brush vs. spatula and cytobrush: A cytohistologic evaluation

Journal of Reproductive Medicine for the Obstetrician and Gynecologist

Volumn 42, Issue 7, 1997, Pages 405-408

  Risberg, Björn ^a,b   Andersson, Agneta ^a   Zetterberg, Carina ^a   Nordin, Barbro ^a  

^a ÖREBRO MEDICAL CENTRE HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

Author keywords

Cervical smears; Mass screening; Vaginal smears

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLING; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADULT; BIOPSY; CERVIX UTERI; CYTODIAGNOSIS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0030785647     PISSN: 00247758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. DiBonito L, Falconieri G, Tomasic G, et al: Cervical cytopathology: An evaluation of its accuracy based on cytohistologic comparison. Cancer 1993;72:3002-3006
2. Dodd LG, Sneige N, Villarreal Y, et al: Quality-assurance study of simultaneously sampled, non-correlating cervical cytology and biopsies. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:138-144
3. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR: False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 1985;29:1043-1046
4. van der Graaf Y, Vooijs GP, Gaillard HLJ, et al: Screening errors in cervical cytologic screening. Acta Cytol 1987;31:434-438
5. Morell ND, Taylor JR, Snyder RN, et al: False negative cytology rates in patients in whom invasive cervical cancer subsequently developed. Obstet Gynecol 1982;60:41-45
6. Joseph MG, Cragg F, Wright VC, et al: Cyto-histological correlates in a colposcopic clinic: A 1-year prospective study. Diagn Cytopathol 1991;7:477-481
7. Joste NE, Crum CP, Cibas ES: Cytologic/histologic correlation for quality control in cervicovaginal cytology: Experience with 1,582 paired cases. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;103: 32-34
8. Longfield JC, Grimshaw RN, Monaghan JM: Simultaneous sampling of the endocervix using the profile brush. Acta Cytol 1993;37:472-476
9. Stock RJ, Thurmond AI, Passmore A: A comparison between the Accu-Pap device and the extended-tip wooden Ayre spatula for cervical cytology sampling. Acta Cytol 1988;32: 307-310
10. Tyau L, Hernandez E, Anderson L, et al: The Cell-Sweep: A new cervical cytology sampling device. J Reprod Med 1994;39:899-902
11. Waddell CA, Rollason TP, Amarilli JM, et al: The Cervex-Brush: An ectocervical brush sampler. Cytopathology 1990;1:171-181
12. Tritz DM, Weeks JA, Spires SE, et al: Etiologies for non-correlating cervical cytologies and biopsies. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;103:594-597
13. Andersen ES, Nielsen K, Larsen G: Laser conization: Follow-up in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in the cone margin. Gynecol Oncol 1990;39:328-331
14. Vooijs PG, Elias A, van der Graaf Y, et al: Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1985;29:323-328
15. Boon ME, de Graff Guilloud JC, Rietveld WJ: Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1989;33:843-848
16. Germain M, Heaton R, Erickson D, et al: A comparison of the three most common Papanicolaou smear collection techniques. Obstet Gynecol 1994;84:168-173
17. Metcalf KS, Sutton J, Moloney MD, et al: Which cervical sampler?: A comparison of four methods. Cytopathology 1994; 5:219-225
18. Woodman CBJ, Yates M, Ward K, et al: Indicators of effective cytological sampling of the uterine cervix. Lancet 1989;2:88-90
19. Evans DMD, Hudson EA, Brown CL, et al: Terminology in gynaecological Cytopathology: Report of the working party of the British Society for Clinical Cytology. J Clin Pathol 1986;39:933-944
20. Cannon JM, Blythe JG: Comparison of the Cytobrush plus plastic spatula with the Cervex-Brush for obtaining endocervical cells. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:569-572
21. Hutchinson M, Fertittia MS, Goldbaum B, et al: Cervex-Brush and Cytobrush: Comparison of their ability to sample abnormal cells for cervical smears. J Reprod Med 1991;36: 581-586
22. Szarewski A, Curran G, Edwards R, et al: Comparison of four cytological sampling techniques in a large family planning center. Acta Cytol 1993;37:457-460
23. Laverty CR, Farnsworth A, Thurloe JK, et al: The importance of the cell sample in cervical cytology: A controlled trial of a new sampling device. Med J Aust 1989;150:432-434
24. Ferris DG, Berrey MM, Ellis KE, et al: The optimal technique for obtaining a Papanicolaou smear with Cervex-Brush. J Fam Prac 1992;34:276-280
25. Wolfendale M: Cervical samplers: Most important variable is probably the operator's skill. Br Med J 1991;302:1554-1555