False negatives in focused rescreening of Papanicolaou smears: How frequently are 'abnormal' cells detected in retrospective review of smears preceding cancer or high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia?

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 121, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 273-276

  Wilbur, David C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DYSPLASIA; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; QUALITY CONTROL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATHOLOGY, CLINICAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0030965459     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Rules and regulations. Federal Register. 1992;57:7137-7186.
2. Bosch MMC, Rietveld-Scheffers PEM, Boon ME. Characteristics of false negative smears tested in the normal screening situation. Acta Cytol. 1992;56:711-716.
3. 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.
4. Hatem F, Wilbur DC. High-grade squamous cervical lesions following negative Papanicolaou smears: false-negative cervical cytology or rapid progression. Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;12:135-141.
5. Kreiger P, Naryshkin S. Random rescreening of cytologic smears: a practical and effective component of quality assurance programs in both large and small cytology laboratories. Acta Cytol. 1994;38:291-298.
6. Dressel DM, Wilbur DC. Atypical immature squamous metaplastic cells in cervical smears: association with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HGSIL) and carcinomas of the cervix. Acta Cytol. 1992;36:630.
7. Sheils LA, Wilbur DC. The significance of atypical cells of squamous type on Papanicolaou smears with stratification of risk based on morphologic type: a 5 year follow-up study. Acta Cytol. 1997. In press.
8. Frable WJ. Litigation cells: definition and observations on a cell type in cervical vaginal smears not addressed by the Bethesda System. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;11:213-215.
9. Frable WJ. "Litigation cells" in the Papanicolaou smear: extramural review of smears by "experts." Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;121:292-295.
10. Tabbara SO, Sidawy MK. Evaluation of the 5-year review of negative cervical smears in patients with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Diagn Cytopathol. 1996;15:7-11.
11. 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.
12. Austin RM. In search of a "reasonable person standard" for gynecologic cytologists. Diagn Cytopathol. 1994;11:216-218.