Keeping collecting device in liquid medium is mandatory to ensure optimized liquid-based cervical cytologic sampling

Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 168-174

  Bigras, Gilbert ^a   Anna Rieder, Malgorzata ^a   Lambercy, Jean Marc ^b   Kunz, Bernard ^b   Chatelain, Jean Paul ^b   Reymond, Olivier ^b   Cornaz, Daniel ^b  

^a Unilabs   (France)

^b Groupement des Gynecol Vaudois   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Collecting device; Liquid based cytology; Sampling

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CELL CULTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURE TECHNIQUE; CYTOLOGY; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; GYNECOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTRACELLULAR FLUID; LIQUID CULTURE; RANDOMIZATION; SAMPLING; SMEAR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UTERINE CERVIX; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 0043124433     PISSN: 10892591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00128360-200307000-00003     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Baandrup U, Bishop JW, Bonfiglio TA, Branca M, Hutchinson ML, Laverty CR, et al. Sampling, sampling errors and specimen preparation. Acta Cytol 2000;44:944-8.
2. Al-Awadhi R, Byrne M, Coleman DV. The preparation of additional smears from a cervical scrape: Impact on the rate of detection of cervical neoplasia. Cytopathology 2001;12:151-6.
3. Goodman A, Hutchinson ML. Cell surplus on sampling devices after routine cervical cytologic smears. A study of residual cell populations. J Reprod Med 1996;41:239-41.
4. Hutchinson ML, Isenstein LM, Goodman A, Hurley AA, Douglass KL, Mui KK, et al. Homogeneous sampling accounts for the increased diagnostic accuracy using the Thin-Prep Processor. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:215-9.
5. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:114-9.
6. Helderman G, Graham L, Cannon D, Waters K, Feller D. Comparing two sampling techniques for endocervical cell recovery on Pap smears. Nurse Pract 1990;15:30-2.
7. Lo L, Jordan J. Comparative yield of endocervical and metaplastic cells. Two sampling techniques: Wooden spatula and cytology brush. Can Fam Physician 1995;41:1497-502.
8. Martin-Hirssch P, Jarvis G, Kitchener H, Lilford R. Collection devices for obtaining cervical cytology samples (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X), Issue 2, 2000 (Document reference: CD001036). Oxford: Update Software. Updated quarterly.
9. Martin-Hirsch P, Lilford R, Jarvis G, Kitchener HC. Efficacy of cervical-smear collection devices: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 1999;354:1763-70.
10. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. Assumptions of analysis of variance. In: Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ, eds. Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. 3rd ed. New York: W.H. Freeman; 1995:396-406.
11. Celasun B. Presence of endocervical cells and number of slides in cervicovaginal smears: Differences in performance between gynecologists. Acta Cytol 2001;45:730-4.
12. Kane BR, Berger MS, Lisney M. Pap smear adequacy: The role of clinician experience. Fam Med 1997;29:315-7.
13. Szarewski A, Curran G, Edwards R, Cuzick J, Kocjan G, Bounds W. Guillebaud comparison of four cytologic sampling techniques in a large family planning center. Acta Cytol 1993;37:457-60.
14. Schettino F, Sideri M, Cangini L, Candiani M, Zannoni E, Maggi R, et al. Endocervical detection of CIN. Cytobrush versus cotton. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1993;14:234-6.
15. Al-Awadhi R, Byrne M, Coleman DV. The preparation of additional smears from a cervical scrape: Impact on the rate of detection of cervical neoplasia. Cytopathology 2001;12:151-6.
16. Loeffelholz MJ, Jirsa SJ, Teske RK, Woods JN. Effect of endocervical specimen adequacy on ligase chain reaction detection of Chlamydia trachomatis. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:3838-41.
17. Kellogg JA, Seiple JW, Klinedinst JL, Stroll ES, Cavanaugh SH. Improved PCR detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by using an altered method of specimen transport and high-quality endocervical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1995;33:2765-7.