Quality assurance in cervical screening of a high risk population: A study of 65,753 reviewed cases in Parana Screening Program, Brazil

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 441-448

  Collaço, Luiz Martins ^a,b   De Noronha, Lúcia ^a,b,c   Pinheiro, Diogo Lago ^c   Bleggi Torres, Luiz Fernando ^a,b,c,d  

^a Assoc of Pathologists of Parana   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PARANÁ   (Brazil)

^c PONTIFICAL CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF PARANÁ   (Brazil)

^d Department of Pathology ^*  (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer screening; Cervical cytology; Quality assurance; Quality control

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAZIL; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; FEMALE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; BRAZIL; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK FACTORS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 28844484576     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.20328     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Tabbara SO, Sidawy MK. Evaluation of the 5-year review of negative cervical smears in patients with high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 1996;15:7-10; discussion 10-11.
2. Hanselaar AG. Criteria for organized cervical screening programs. Special emphasis on The Netherlands program. Acta Cytol 2002;46:619-629.
3. Koss LG. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 1989;261:737-743.
4. Arbyn M, Schenck U, Ellison E, Hanselaar A. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears. Cancer 2003;99:9-16.
5. Rohr LR. Quality assurance in gynecologic cytology. What is practical? Am J Clin Pathol 1990;94:754-758.
6. Baker A, Melcher D, Smith R. Role of re-screening of cervical smears in internal quality control. J Clin Pathol 1995;48:1002-1004.
7. Cross PA. Internal quality assurance in cervical cytology one laboratory's experience. Cytopathology 1996;7:25-31.
8. Brooke D, Dudding N, Sutton J. Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: the quality control method of choice? Cytopathology 2002;13:191-199.
9. Renshaw AA. Rescreening in cervical cytology for quality control. When bad data is worse than no data or what works, what doesn't, and why. Clin Lab Med 2003;23:695-708.
10. Smith J, Nicholas D, Boyd K, Deacon-Smith R. Rapid pre-screening: a validated quality assurance measure in cervical cytology. Cytopathology 2003;14:275-280.
11. Sebastiao AP, Noronha L, Pinheiro DL, Collaco LM, de Carvalho NS, Bleggi-Torres LF. Influence of specimen adequacy on the diagnosis of ASCUS. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;31:155-158.
12. Luff RD. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. Report of the 1991 Bethesda Workshop. Am J Clin Pathol 1992;98:152-154.
13. Bleggi-Torres LF, Werner B, Totsugui J, et al. Cervical cancer screening program of Parana: cost-effective model in a developing country. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;29:49-54.
14. Wang SE, Ritchie MJ, Atkinson BF. Cervical cytologic smear false negative fraction. Reduction in a small community hospital. Acta Cytol 1997;41:1690-1696.
15. Yobs AR, Plott AE, Hicklin MD, et al. Retrospective evaluation of gynecologic cytodiagnosis. II. Interlaboratory reproducibility as shown in rescreening large consecutive samples of reported cases. Acta Cytol 1987;31:900-910.
16. Pairwuti S. False-negative Papanicolaou smears from women with cancerous and precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol 1991;35:40-46.
17. Jones BA. Rescreening in gynecologic cytology. Rescreening of 3762 previous cases for current high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and carcinoma-a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 312 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1995;119:1097-1103.
18. Joste NE, Crum CP, Cibas ES. Cytologic/histologic correlation for quality control in cervicovaginal cytology. Experience with 1,582 paired cases. Am J Clin Pathol 1995;103:32-34.
19. Pillay B, Yap SK, Lim GL. Post-menopausal smear patterns-a review of vaginal smears in 480 women. Med J Malaysia 1992;47:38-43.
20. Kini SR. Squamous lesions. In: Kini SR, editor. Color atlas of differential diagnosis in exfoliative and aspiration cytopathology. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999. p 41-106.
21. Economos K, Perez-Veridiano N, Mann M, Delke I, Tancer ML. Abnormal cervical cytology in adolescents. A 15-year experience. J Reprod Med 1994;39:973-976.
22. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Alonso de Ruiz P, Lopez-Carrillo L, et al. Validity and reproducibility of cytologic diagnosis in a sample of cervical cancer screening centers in Mexico. Acta Cytol 1997;41:277-284.
23. Giard RW. False-negative rate of cervical cytology: sense and sensitivity. Diagn Cytopathol 2001;25:275-277.
24. Colgan TJ, Woodhouse SL, Styer PE, Kennedy M, Davey DD. Reparative changes and the false-positive/false-negative Papanicolaou test: a study from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:134-140.
25. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:390-396.
26. Duggan MA, Brasher PM. Accuracy of Pap tests reported as CIN I. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;21:129-136.
27. Mody DR, Davey DD, Branca M, et al. Quality assurance and risk reduction guidelines. Acta Cytol 2000;44:496-507.
28. Stoler MH. New Bethesda terminology and evidence-based management guidelines for cervical cytology findings. JAMA 2002;287:2140-2141.
29. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-2119.
30. Schneider V. Microscopic diagnosis of HPV infection. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1989;32:148-156.
31. DeMay RM. The Pap smear. In: DeMay RM, editor. The art & science of cytopathology. Chicago: American Society of Clinical Pathologists; 1996. p 63-4.
32. Meisels A, Morin C. Cytopathology of the uterus: theory and practice of cytopathology, 2nd ed. Chicago: American Society of Clinical Pathologists; 1997.
33. Collaço LM, Tuon FFB, Soares MF, Totsugui JT, Bleggi-Torres LF, Pinto AP. Correlação cito-histológica em 326 pacientes submetidas a cirurgia de alta freqüência (CAF) no Programa de Prevenção de Câncer Ginecológico do Estado do Paraná. J Bras Patol 2000;36:191-197.
34. Barker B, Garcia F, Lozevski J, Warner J, Hatch K. The correlation between colposcopically directed cervical biopsy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure pathology and the effect of time on that agreement. Gynecol Oncol 2001;82:22-26.
35. Massad LS, Collins YC, Meyer PM. Biopsy correlates of abnormal cervical cytology classified using The Bethesda System. Gynecol Oncol 2001;82:516-522.
36. di Loreto C, Maeda MY, Utagawa ML, Longatto Filho A, Alves VA. [Quality assurance in cytopathology: aspects of the cytohistological correlation.] Rev Assoc Med Bras 1997;43:195-198.
37. Holowaty P, Miller AB, Rohan T, To T. Natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999;91:252-258.