ThinPrep(®) Pap test(TM): Performance and biopsy follow-up in a University Hospital

Cancer

Volumn 87, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 105-112

  Carpenter, A Betts ^a,b   Davey, Diane D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b King's Daughters' Medical Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Carcinoma; Cervical cytology; Cervix; Dysplasia; Papanicolaou; Screening; Smears; ThinPrep( )

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DYSPLASIA; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; ADULT; BIOPSY; CARCINOMA; MASS SCREENING; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADULT; BIOPSY; CARCINOMA; CERVIX UTERI; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0033603057     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19990625)87:3<105::AID-CNCR2>3.0.CO;2-Z     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL. Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:278-84.
2. Bolick DR, Hellman DJ. Laboratory implementation and efficacy assessment of the ThinPrep cervical cancer screening system. Acta Cytol 1998;42:209-13.
3. Papillo JL, Zarka MA, St. John PL. Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap test in clinical practice: a seven month, 16,314-case experience in northern Vermont. Acta Cytol 1998;42:203-8.
4. Sheets EE, Constantine NM, Dinisco S, Dean B, Cibas ES. Colposcopically directed biopsies provide a basis for comparing the accuracy of ThinPrep and Papanicolaou smears. J Gynecol Tech 1995;1:27-34.
5. National Cancer Institute Workshop. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnosis. Acta Cytol 1993;37:115-24.
6. Tritz DM, Weeks JA, Spires SE, Sattich M, Banks H, Cibull ML, et al. Etiologies for non-correlating cervical cytologies and biopsies. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;103:594-7.
7. Intersociety Working Group for Cytology Technologies. Proposed guidelines for primary screening instruments for gynecologic cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 1997;109:10-5.
8. Sherman ME, Mendoza M, Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, et al. Performance of liquid-based, thin-layer cervical cytology: correlation with reference diagnoses and human papillomavirus testing. Mod Pathol 1998;11:837-43.
9. Wilbur DC. New technology in gynecologic cytology: automation in cytology screening and thin-layer preparation techniques. In: Bonfiglio TA, Erozan YS, editors. Gynecologic cytopathology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1997:171-97.
10. DiBonito L, Falconieri G, Tomasic G, Colautti I, Bonifacio D, Dudine S. Cervical cytopathology. An evaluation of its accuracy based on cytohistologic comparison. Cancer 1993;72: 3002-6.
11. Jones BA, Novis DA. Cervical biopsy-cytology correlation. A College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 22439 correlations in 348 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996; 120:523-31.
12. Richart RM, Wright TC. Controversies in the management of low-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Cancer 1993;71: 1413-21.
13. Austin RM, Ramzy I. Increased detection of epithelial cell abnormalities by liquid-based gynecologic cytology preparations. A review of accumulated data. Acta Cytol 1998;42: 178-84.
14. Dupree WB, Suprun HZ, Beckwith DG, Shane JJ, Lucente V. The promise and risk of a new technology. The Lehigh Valley Hospital's experience with liquid-based cervical cytology. Cancer (Cancer) Cytopathol 1998;84:202-7.
15. Linder J, Zahniser D. ThinPrep Papanicolaou testing to reduce false negative cervical cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998;122:139-44.
16. Roberts JM, Gurley AM, Thurloe JK, Bowditch R, Laverty CR. Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap test as an adjunct to the conventional Pap smear. Med J Aust 1997;167:466-9.
17. Davey DD, Nielsen ML, Naryshkin S, Robb JA, Cohen T, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Current laboratory practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996;120:440-4.
18. Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. 1997 PAP supplemental questionnaire, laboratory practice: ASCUS/AGUS. Northfield, IL: College of American Pathologists, 1999.
19. Johnson JE, Jones HW, Conrad KA, Huff BC. Increased rate of SIL detection with excellent biopsy correlation after implementation of direct-to-vial ThinPrep liquid-based preparation of cervicovaginal specimens at a University Medical Center. Acta Cytol 1998;5:1242-3.
20. Papillo JL, St. John TL, Zarka MA. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS): widening the differential between reactive and neoplastic processes utilizing the ThinPrep technique. Acta Cytol 1998;5:1244-5.
21. Hall S, Wu TC, Soudi N, Sherman ME. Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions: cytologic predictors of biopsy confirmation. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;10:3-9.
22. Austin RM. Implementing liquid-based gynecologic cytology: balancing marketing, financial, and scientific issues. Cancer (Cancer) Cytopathol 1998;84:193-6.
23. Corkill M, Knapp D, Martin J, Hutchinson ML. Specimen adequacy of ThinPrep sample preparations in a direct-to-vial study. Acta Cytol 1997;41:39-44.