Enhancing recovery of endocervical component on gynecologic cytology specimens processed by thin-layer technology

Acta Cytologica

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 172-176

  Tibbs, Rita F ^a   Wong, Jick Y ^a   Logroño, Roberto ^a,b  

^a University of Texas Medical Branch School of Medicine   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical smears; Cervix neoplasms; Endocervical component; Mass screening; Papanicolaou smear; SurePath ; Thin layer cytology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; FEMALE; HEALTH CENTER; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLING; SQUAMOUS CELL METAPLASIA; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE ENDOCERVIX;

EID: 0037344482     PISSN: 00015547     EISSN: 19382650     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000326499     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Weintraub J, Morabia A: Efficacy of a liquid-based thin layer method for cervical cancer screening in a population with a low incidence of cervical cancer. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;22:52-59
2. 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 1998;84:202-207
3. Vassilakos P, Griffin S, Megevand E, Campana A: CytoRich liquid-based cervical cytologic test: Screening results in a routine cytopathology service. Acta Cytol 1998;42:198-202
4. Bishop JW, Bigner SH, Colgan TJ, Husain M, Howell LP, McIntosh KM, Taylor DA, Sadeghi MH: Multicenter masked evaluation of AutoCyte PREP thin layers with matched conventional smears: Including initial biopsy results. Acta Cytol 1998;42:189-197
5. 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
6. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, Raab M, Sherman M, Wilbur D, Wright T Jr, Young N: The 2001 Bethesda System: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-2119
7. Elias A, Linthorst G, Bekker B, Vooijs PG: The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes. Acta Cytol 1983;27:245-229
8. Boon ME, De Graaff Guilloud JC, Rietveld WJ: Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1989;33:843-848
9. Vooijs PG, 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
10. Selvaggi SM, Guidos BJ: Endocervical component: Is it determinant of specimen adequacy? Diagn Cytopathol 2002;26:53-55
11. Mitchell HS: Longitudinal analysis of histologic high-grade disease after negative cervical cytology according to endocervical status. Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93:237-240
12. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, Elske van den Akker-van Marle M, Hanselaar AG, van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD: Endocervical status is not predictive of the incidence of cervical cancer in the years after negative smears. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;115:851-855
13. Kivlahan C, Ingram E: Papanicolaou smears without endocervical cells: Are they adequate? Acta Cytol 1986;30:258-260
14. Birdsong GG: Pap smear adequacy: Is our understanding satisfactory... or limited? (edit). Diagn Cytopathol 2001;24:79-81
15. Cramer DW: The role of cervical cytology in the declining morbidity and mortality of cervical cancer. Cancer 1974;34:2018-2027
16. Christopherson WM, Lundin FE Jr, Mendex WM, Parker JR: Cervical cancer control: A study of morbidity and mortality trends over a 21 year period. Cancer 1978;38:1357-1366
17. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ: 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-2129