Specimen adequacy of thinprep sample preparations in a direct-to-vial study

Acta Cytologica

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 39-44

  Corkill, Mary ^a,b   Knapp, Danielle ^a,c   Martin, Juanita ^a,d   Hutchinson, Martha L ^a,e  

^a Ameripath Colorado Pathol Consult   (United States)

^b and Staff Pathologist   (United States)

^c Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains   (United States)

^d TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e WOMEN AND INFANTS HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical smears; Cytological techniques; Endocervical component; Thin layer

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TISSUE SECTION; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE ENDOCERVIX;

EID: 0031047989     PISSN: 00015547     EISSN: 19382650     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000332303     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Ferenczy A, Wright TC: Anatomy and histology of the cervix. In Blaustein's Pathology of the Female Genital Tract. Fourth edition. Edited by RJ Kurman. New York, SpringerVerlag, 1994, pp 185-201
2. Vooijs GP: Benign proliferative reactions, intraepithelial neoplasia and invasive cancer of the uterine cervix. In Comprehensive Cytopathology. Edited by M Bibbo. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1991, pp 153-230
3. Elias E, Linthorst G, Bekker B, Vooijs GP: The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes. Acta Cytol 1983;27:225-229
4. Vooijs GP, Elias A, Van der Graaf Y, Veling S: Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1985;29:323-328
5. Vooijs GP, Elias A, Van der Graaf Y, Poelen-vande Berg M: The influence of sample takers on the cellular composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1986;30:251-257
6. Kristensen GB, Skyggebjerg K, Holund B, Holm K, Hansen MK: Analysis of cervical smears obtained within three years of the diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer. Acta Cytol 1991;35:47-50
7. Mitchell H, Medley G: Longitudinal study of women with negative cervical smears according to endocervical status. Lancet 1991;337:265-267
8. Kivalahan C, Ingram E: Papanicolaou smears without endo-cervical cells: Are they adequate? Acta Cytol 1986;30:258-260
9. Kurman RJ, Solomon D: The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Cytologic Diagnoses: Definitions, Criteria, and Explanatory Notes for Terminology and Specimen Adequacy. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1994
10. Wilbur D, Cibas E, Merritt S, James LP, Berger B, Bonfiglio T: ThinPrep® Processor clinical trials demonstrate an increased detection rate of abnormal cervical cytologic specimens: Thin layer processing for cervical cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:209-214
11. Sheets EE, Constantine NM, Dinisco S, Dean B, Cibas E: Col-poscopically directed biopsies provide a basis for comparing the accuracy of ThinPrep and Papanicolaou smears. J Gynecol Techniques 1995;1:27-33
12. James LP, Knapp D: New cervical cytology preparation device shows improved sensitivity to abnormal findings over the conventional Papanicolaou smear (abstr). Acta Cytol 1992;36:579
13. Awen C, Hathway S, Eddy W, Voskuil R, Janes C: The efficacy of ThinPrep preparations of cervical smears: A 1,000-case, investigator-sponsored study. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;11:33-37
14. Bur M, Knowles K, Pekow P, Corral O, Donovan J: Comparison of ThinPrep preparations with conventional cervico-vaginal smears. Acta Cytol 1994;39:631-642
15. Aponte-Cipriani SL, Teplitz C, Rorat E, Savino A, Jacobs A: Cervical smears prepared by an automated device versus the conventional method. Acta Cytol 1994;39:623-630
16. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Sherman ME, Inhorn SL: Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening (submitted for publication)
17. Evans SK, Wilbur DC: Identification of endocervical cells and microorganisms on cervical thin-layer cytology specimens: Comparison to paired conventional smears (abstr). Acta Cytol 1993;37:776
18. Dixon W, Massey FJ: Introduction to Statistical Analysis. Fourth edition. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1983
19. Hutchinson ML, Fertitta L, Goldbaum B, Hamza M, Vaner-ian S, Isenstein L: Cervex-brush and Cytobrush: Comparison of their ability to sample abnormal cells for cervical smears. J Reprod Med 1991;36:581-586
20. Ferenczy A, Robitaille J, Guralnick M, Shatz R: Cervical cytology with the Papette sampler. J Reprod Med 1994;39:304-310
21. Szarewski A, Cuzick J, Nayagam M, Thin RN: A comparison of four cytological sampling techniques in a genitourinary medicine clinic. Genitourin Med 1990;66:439-443
22. Szarewski A, Curran G, Edwards R, Cuzick J, Kocjan G, Bounds W, Guillebaud J: Comparison of four cytologic sampling techniques in a large family planning clinic. Acta Cytol 1993;37:457-460