Improvement of diagnostic accuracy and screening conditions with liquid-based cytology

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 34, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 780-785

  Schledermann, Doris ^a   Ejersbo, Dorthe ^a   Hoelund, Berit ^a  

^a ODENSE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Cervical cytology; CIN; Conventional Papanicolaou smear; Dysplasia; Liquid based cytology; Screening; ThinPrep

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; DENMARK; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY; UTERINE CERVIX DYSPLASIA;

ADULT; AGED; CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 33744466630     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: 10970339     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.20515     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. Riotton G, Christopherson WM. International histological classification of tumors. No. 8. Cytology of the female genital tract. Geneva: WHO: 1973.
2. Danish Society for Pathological Anatomy and Clinical Cytology. Recommendations for quality control of the cervical cancer screening. Copenhagen: Danish Society for Pathological Anatomy and Clinical Cytology: 2000 (in Danish).
3. Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, et al. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2000;132:810-819.
4. Hutchinson ML, Isenstein LM, Goodman A, et al. Homogeneous sampling accounts for the increased diagnostic accuracy using the ThinPrep processor. Am J Clin Path 1994;101:215-219.
5. Bigaard J, Hariri J, Lynge E. Cervical cancer screening in Denmark. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2198-2204.
6. National Board of Health, Health Statistics, Cancer Incidence in Denmark 1999. Copenhagen; 2003. Available from URL: http://www.sst.dk/publ/publ2003/ Cancer_Incidens_DK_1999.pdf.
7. Hoelund B. Implementation of liquid-based cytology in the screening program against cervical cancer in the County of Funen, Denmark, and status for the first year. Cytopathology 2003;14:269-274.
8. Solomon D, Nayar R, editors. The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology. Definitions, criteria and explanatory notes. 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag: 2004.
9. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of liquid-based cytology for cervical screening. Technology Appraisal 69. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence: 2003.
10. Hutchinson ML, Zahniser DJ, Sherman ME, et al. Utility of liquid-based cytology for cervical carcinoma screening. Results of a population-based study conducted in a region of Costa Rica with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma. Cancer 1999;87:48-55.
11. Biscotti CV, O'Brien DL, Gero MA, et al. Thin-layer Pap test vs. conventional Pap smear. Analysis of 400 split samples. J Reprod Med 2002;47:9-13.
12. Guidos BJ, Selvaggi SM. Use of the ThinPrep® PapTest™ in clinical practice. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;20:70-73.
13. Díaz-Rosario LA, Kabawat SE. Performance of a fluid-based, thin-layer Papanicolaou smear method in the clinical selling of an independent laboratory and an outpatient screening population in New England. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1999;123:817-821.
14. Schledermann D, Ejersbo D, Hoelund B. Significance of atypia in conventional Papanicolaou smears and liquid-based cytology: A follow-up study. Cytopathology 2003;15:148-153.
15. Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM. Performance of ThinPrep liquid-based cervical cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears: A quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol 2003;90:137-144.
16. Baker JJ. Conventional and liquid-based cervicovaginal cytology: A comparison study with clinical and histologic follow-up. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;27:185-188.
17. Carpenter AB, Davey DD. ThinPrep Pap Test: Performance and biopsy follow-up in a university hospital. Cancer 1999;87:105-112.
18. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: A metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:308-317.
19. Limaye A, Connor AJ, Huang X, et al. Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003;127:200-204.
20. Hatch KD, Sheets B, Kennedy A, et al. Multicenter direct to vial evaluation of a liquid-based pap lest. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2004;8:308-312.
21. Guo M, Hu L, Martin L, et al. Accuracy of liquid-based Pap tests: Comparison of concurrent liquid-based tests and cervical biopsies on 782 women with previously abnormal Pap smears. Acta Cytol 2005;49:132-138.
22. Stoler MH, Schiffman M. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations. Realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage study. JAMA 2001;285:1500-1505.