A study to determine the underlying reason for abnormal glandular cytology and the formation of a management protocol

Cytopathology

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 20-26

  Leeson, S C ^a   Inglis, T C M ^b   Salman, W D ^b  

^a LANCASHIRE TEACHING HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b BURNLEY GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

glandular dyskaryosis; management

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DYSKARYOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA;

EID: 0031028375     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2303.1997.43175431.x     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Shingleton HM, Gore H, Bradley DH, Soong SJ. Adenocarcinoma of the cervix I: clinical evaluation and pathologic features. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 139: 799-812.
2. Davis JR, Moon LB. Increased incidence of adenocarcinoma of uterine cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1975; 45: 79-83.
3. Austoker J. Cancer prevention in primary care: screening for cervical cancer. BMJ 1994; 309: 241-248.
4. Brown LJR, Wells M. Cervical glandular atypia associated with squamous intraepithelial neoplasia: a premalignant lesion? J Clin Pathol 1986; 39: 22-28.
5. Luesley DM, Jordan JA, Woodman CBJ et al. A retrospective review of adenocarcinoma in situ and glandular atypia of the uterine cervix. Brit J Obstet Gynaecol 1987; 94: 699-703.
6. Golf BA, Atanasoff P, Brown E et al. Endocervical glandular atypia in Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 79: 101-4.
7. Rosenthal DL, McLatchie C, Stern E, White BS, Castleman KR. Endocervical columnar cell atypia coincident with cervical neoplasia characterised by digital image analysis. Acta Cytol 1982; 26: 115-20.
8. Buscema J, Woodruff JD. The significance of neo-plastic atypicalities in endocervical epithelium. Gynecol Oncol 1984; 17: 356-62.
9. Nguyen G-K, Jeannot AB. Exfoliative cytology of in situ and microinvasive adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol 1984; 28: 461-76.
10. Selim MA, So-Bosita JL, Blair OM, Little BA. Cervical biopsy versus conization. Obstet Gynecol 1973; 41: 177-82.
11. Beilby JOW, Bourne R, Giullebaud J, Steele ST. Paired cervical smears: a method of reducing the false negative rate in population screening. Obstet Gynecol 1982; 60: 46-48.