Five-year follow-up of women with borderline and mildly dyskaryotic cervical smears

Cytopathology

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 263-270

  Rana, D N ^a   Marshall, J ^a   Desai, M ^a   Kitchener, H C ^a   Perera, D M ^a   El Teraifi, H ^a   Persad, R V ^a  

^a MANCHESTER ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Borderline nuclear changes; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Koilocytosis; Mild dyskaryosis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BORDERLINE NUCLEAR CHANGE; BRITISH SOCIETY FOR CLINICAL CYTOLOGY; BRITISH SOCIETY FOR COLPOSCOPY AND CERVICAL PATHOLOGY; CANCER GRADING; COLPOSCOPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DYSKARYOSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; KOILOCYTOSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NOMENCLATURE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

CELL NUCLEUS; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; TERMINOLOGY; UTERINE CERVICAL DYSPLASIA; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 6344235451     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2004.00194.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Evans DMD, Hudson EA, Brown CL et al. Terminology in gynaecological cytopathology: report of the Working Party of the British Society for Clinical Cytology. J Clin Pathol 1986;39:933-44.
2. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, 2nd edn. Solomon D, Nayar R. (eds.) New York: Springer-Verlang, 2004.
3. Coleman D, Day N, Douglas G et al. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening. Eur J Cancer 1993;29A(Suppl. 4):31-8.
4. Screening to prevent cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of women with screen detected abnormalities. Report by the National Health and Medical Research Council for the Organised Approach to Preventing Cancer of the Cervix. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health, Australian Government Printing Service, 1994.
5. BSCC Terminology 2002, 28th August 2003 draft. UK: BSCC; 2003.
6. NHSCP. Colposcopy and Programme Management: Guidelines for the Cervical Screening Programme. Publication No. 20. UK: NHSCP; 2004.
7. Anderson DJ, Flannelly GM, Kitchener HC et al. Mild and moderate dyskaryosis; can women be selected for colposcopy on the basis of social criteria? Br Med J 1992;305:84-7.
8. Soutter WP, Wisdom S, Brough AK, Monaghan JM. Should patients with mild atypia in a cervical smear be referred for colposcopy? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1986;93:70-4.
9. Flannelly G, Anderson D, Kitchener HC et al. Management of women with mild and moderate cervical dyskaryosis. Br Med J 1994;308:1399-403.
10. Johnson N, Sutton J, Thornton JG et al. Decision analysis for best management of mildly dyskaryotic smear. Lancet 1993;343:91-6.
11. Koss LG, Durfee GR. Unusual patterns of squamous epithelium of uterine cervix; cytologic and pathologic study of koilocytotic atypia. Ann NY Acad Sci 1956;63:1235-61
12. Shanbhag S, Roberts M, Johnson SJ, Wadehra V. Subtyping borderline nuclear changes: is it of value in predicting high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia on histology? Cytopathology 2003;14:241-8.
13. Edwards JM, Hermansen PJ, Hillier VF, Howat AJ. Borderline nuclear change; can a subgroup be identified which is suspicious of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, i.e. CIN 2 or worse? Cytopathology 2002; 13:267-72.
14. Al-Nafussi A, Rebello G, Al-Yusif R, McGoogan E. The borderline cervical smear: colposcopic and biopsy outcome. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:439-44.
15. Milne DS, Wadhera V, Mennim D, Wagstaff TI. A prospective follow up study of women with colposcopically unconfirmed positive cervical smears. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:38-41.
16. Heatley MK. Follow up of women with borderline cervical smears as defined by national guidelines. J Clin Pathol 1999;52:787-8.
17. Cooper P, Kirby AJ, Spiegelhalter DJ, Whitehead AL, Patterson A. Management of women with a cervical smear showing a mild degree of dyskaryosis: a review of policy. Cytopathology 1992;3:331-9.
18. Bolger S, Lewis BV. A prospective study of colposcopy in women with mild dyskaryosis or koilocytosis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988;95:1117-9.
19. Nasiell K, Roger V, Nasiell M. Behaviour of mild cervical dysplasia during long-term follow-up. Br Obstet Gynaecol 1986;67:665-9.
20. Emerson RE, Puzanov A, Brunnemer C, Younger C, Cramer H. Long-term follow-up of women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS). Diagn Cytopathol 2002;27:153-7.
21. Lousuebsakul V, Knutsen SMF, Gram IT, Akin MRM. Clinical impact of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance; a cytohistologic comparison. Acta Cytol 2000;44:23-30.
22. Rabb SS, Bishop NS, Zaleski MS. Long-term outcome and relative risk in women with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Clin Pathol 1999;112:57-62.
23. Sheils LA, Wilbur DC. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance; stratification of the risk of the association with, or progression to, squamous intraepithelial lesions based on morphologic subcategorisation. Acta Cytol 1997;41:1065-72.
24. Ghoussoub RAD, Rimm DL. Degree of dysplasia following diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance is influenced by patient history and type of follow-up. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;17:14-9.
25. Auger M, Charbonneau M, Arseneau J. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance; a cytohistologic study of 52 cases. Acta Cytol 1997;41:1671-5.
26. Andrews S, Hernandez E, Miyazawa K. Paired Papanicolaou smears in the evaluation of atypical squamous cells. Obstet Gynaecol 1989;73:747-50.
27. Davis GL, Hernandez E, Davis JL, Miyazawa K. Atypical squamous cells in Papanicolaou smears. Obstet Gynaecol 1987;69:43-6.
28. Dudding N, Sutton J, Lane S. Koilocytosis; an indication for conservative management. Cytopathology 1996;7:32-7.