A simple method to determine the need for glacial acetic acid treatment of bloody thinprep pap tests before slide processing

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 31, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 321-325

  Rowe, Leslie R ^a   Bentz, Joel S ^b  

^a ARUP INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Blood; Glacial acetic acid wash; Liquid based cytology; Reprocessing; ThinPrep; Unsatisfactory

Indexed keywords

ACETIC ACID;

ARTICLE; BLOOD SAMPLING; COLOR; COST; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STANDARD;

ACETIC ACID; BLOOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDICATORS AND REAGENTS; SPECIMEN HANDLING; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 7444240707     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.20152     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Roberts JM, Gurley AM, Thurloe JK, Bowditch R, Laverty CRA. Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap Test as an adjunct to the conventional Pap smear. Med J Aust 1997;167:466-469.
2. Papillo JL, Zarka MA, St John TL. Evaluation of the ThinPrep Pap Test in clinical practice: a seven-month 16,314 case experience in northern Vermont. Acta Cytol 1998;42:203-208.
3. Austin RM, Ramzy I. Increased detection of epithelial cell abnormalities by liquid-based gynecologic cytology preparations: a review of accumulated data. Acta Cytol 1998;42:178-184.
4. Bishop JW, Marshall CJ, Bentz JS. New technologies in gynecologic cytology. J Reprod Med 2000;45:701-719.
5. 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.
6. Hutchinson ML, Isenstein LM, Goodman A, et al. Homogeneous sampling accounts for the increased diagnostic accuracy using the ThinPrep processor. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:215-219.
7. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL. Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears in a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol 1999;90:278-284.
8. Hatch KD. Multisite clinical outcome trial to evaluate performance of the ThinPrep Pap test. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:S51.
9. Bentz JS, Rowe LR, Gopez EV, Marshall CJ. The unsatisfactory ThinPrep Pap test: missed opportunity for disease detection? Am J Clin Pathol 2000;117;457-463.
10. Papillo JL, St John TL, Mahohey PD, Sanville RS. Reprocessing of unsatisfactory ThinPrep samples: procedures to improve specimen adequacy and increase detection of cervical abnormalities. Acta Cytol 1998;42:1246
11. Song LH, Goh ES, Phang LC, Poh WT, Tay SK. Technical aspects of ThinPrep. Singapore Med 2000;41:575-578.
12. Belinson JL, Pan QJ, Biscotti C, et al. Primary screening with liquid-based cytology in an unscreened population in rural China, with an emphasis on reprocessing unsatisfactory samples. Acta Cytol 2002;46:470-474.
13. Ferris DG, Wright TC Jr, Litaker MS, et al. Comparison of two tests for detecting carcinogenic HPV in women with Papanicolaou smear reports of ASCUS and LSIL. J Fam Pract 1998;46:136-141.
14. Vassilakos P, de Marval F, Munoz M, Broquet G, Campana A. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA assay as an adjunct to liquid-based Pap test in the diagnostic triage of women with an abnormal Pap smear. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998;61:45-50.
15. 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.
16. Belinson J, Qiao YL, Pretorius R, et al. Shanxi Province Cervical Cancer Screening Study: a cross-sectional comparative trial of multiple techniques to detect cervical neoplasia. Gynecol Oncol 2001;83:439-444.
17. Hughes SA, Sun D, Gibson C, et al. Managing atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS): human papillomavirus testing, ASCUS subtyping, or follow-up cytology? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;186:396-403.
18. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, Twiggs LB, Wilkinson EJ, AS-CCP-Sponsored Consensus Conference. 2001 Consensus Guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-2129.
19. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ. Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA 2002;287:2382-2390.
20. Hong IS, Marshalleck J, Williams RH, Gaiter TE, Mielzynska-Lohnas I, Kim K. Comparative analysis of a liquid-based Pap test and concurrent HPV DNA assay of residual samples. A study of 608 cases. Acta Cytol 2002;46:828-834.
21. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, et al., American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2002;52:342-362.
22. Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Signiflcance-Low-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion (ASCUS-LSIL) Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1383-1392.
23. Agoff AN, Dean T, Nixon BK, Kingalls-Severn K, Rinker L, Grieco VS. The efficacy of reprocessing unsatisfactory cervicovaginal Thin-Prep specimens with and without glacial acetic acid. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;118:727-732.
24. Tezuka F, Oikawa H, Shuki H, Higashiiwai H. Diagnostic efficacy and validity of the ThinPrep method in cervical cytology. Acta Cytol 1996;40:513-518.