The correlation between the grade of dyskaryosis on cervical smear, grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) on punch biopsy and the final histological diagnosis on cone biopsies of the cervix

Cytopathology

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 93-99

  Heatley, M K ^a,b   Bury, J P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^b MUSGROVE PARK HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Cervix; Cytology; Tissue processing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION FUNCTION; DYSKARYOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUNCH BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

BIOPSY; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CERVIX UTERI; COLPOSCOPY; CONIZATION; CRYOSURGERY; ELECTROCOAGULATION; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUALITY CONTROL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0031921474     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2303.1998.00094.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Chakrabarti S, Guijon FB, Paraskevas M. Brush vs spatula for cervical smears. Histologic correlation with concurrent biopsies. Acta Cytol 1994; 38: 315-8.
2. Klinkhamer PJJM, Vooijs GP, de Haan AFJ. Intraobserver and interobserver variability in the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities in cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1988; 32: 794-800.
3. O'Sullivan JP, I.Smail SM, Barnes WSF et al. Interobserver variation in the diagnosis and grading of dyskaryosis in cervical smears: specialist cytopathologists compared with non-specialists. J Clin Pathol 1994; 47: 515-8.
4. Willcox F, de Somer ML, Roy JV. Classification of cervical smears with discordance between the cytologic and/or histologic ratings. Acta Cytol 1987; 31: 883-6.
5. Jarmulowicz MR, Jenkins D, Barton SE et al. Cytological status and lesion size: a further dimension in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96: 1061-6.
6. Foote FW, Stewart FW. The anatomical distribution of intraepithelial epidermoid carcinomas of the cervix. Cancer 1948; 1: 431-40.
7. Buckley CH, Butler EB, Fox H. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Clin Pathol 1982; 35: 1-13.
8. Anderson MC, Brown CL, Buckley CH et al. Current views on cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Clin Pathol 1991; 44: 969-78.
9. 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: 933-44.
10. National Coordinating Network (National Cervical Screening Programme). British Society for Clinical Cytology, and the Royal College of Pathologists' Working Party. Borderline nuclear changes in cervical smears: Guidelines on their recognition and management. J Clin Pathol 1994; 47: 481-92.
11. Herbert A. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting, criteria for evaluation of cervical cytopathology. Cytopathol 1995; 6 (Suppl. 2).
12. Burger MPM, Hollema H. The reliability of the histologic diagnosis in colposcopically directed biopsies. A plea for LETZ. Int J Gynaecol Cancer 1993; 3: 385-90.
13. Kirkup W, Hill AS. The accuracy of colposcopically directed biopsy in patients with suspected intraepithelial neoplasia of the cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1980; 87: 1-4.
14. Parham DM, Wiredu EK, Hussein KA. The cytological prediction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in colposcopically directed biopsies. Cytopathol 1991; 2: 285-90.
15. Skehan M, Soutter WP, Lim K, Krausz T, Pryse-Davies J. Reliability of colposcopy and directed punch biopsy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 811-6.
16. Veridiano NP, Delke I, Tancer ML. Accuracy of colposcopically directed biopsy in patients with cervical neoplasia. Obstet Gynaecol 1981; 58: 185-7.
17. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. Acta Cytologica, 1993; 37: 115-24.
18. Hirschowitz L, Raffle AE, MacKenzie EFD, Hughes AO. Long term follow up of women with borderline cervical test results: effects of age and viral infection on progression to high grade dyskaryosis. Brit Med J 1992; 304: 1209-12.
19. Robertson AJ, Anderson JM, Swanson Beck J et al. Observer variability in histopathological reporting of cervical biopsy specimens. J Clin Pathol 1989; 42: 231-8.
20. McCord ML, Stovall RG, Summitt RL, Ling FW. Discrepancy of cervical cytology and colposcopic biopsy: is cervical conization necessary? Obstet Gyneacol 1991; 77: 715-9.