Comparison of SurePath® and ThinPrep® liquid-based cervical cytology using positive predictive value, atypical predictive value and total predictive value as performance indicators

Cytopathology

Volumn 21, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 374-378

  Wright, P K ^a   Marshall, J ^a   Desai, M ^a  

^a MANCHESTER ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Atypical predictive value; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Cervical screening; Dyskaryosis; Liquid based cytology; Performance indicators; Positive predictive value; SurePath; ThinPrep; Total predictive value

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DYSKARYOSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; SCREENING; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU;

CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; CYTODIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS;

EID: 78650474172     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: 13652303     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2010.00772.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Cervical screening Programme. England. 2007-2008. Statistics Bulletin. The information centre (Government statistics service). Available at: (accessed 20 March 2010).
2. Doyle B, O'Farrell C, Mahoney E et al. Liquid-based cytology improves productivity in cervical cytology screening. Cytopathology 2006;17:60-4.
3. Hussein T, Desai M, Tomlinson A, Kitchener HC. The comparative diagnostic accuracy of conventional and liquid-based cytology in a colposcopy setting. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;112:1542-6.
4. Renshaw AA, Young NA, Birdsong GG et al. Comparison of performance of conventional and ThinPrep gynaecological preparations in the College of American Pathologists Gynecological Cytology Program. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004;128:17-22.
5. Abulafia O, Pezzullo JC, Sherer DM. Performance of ThinPrep liquid-based cytology in comparison with conventionally prepared Papanicolaou smears, a quantitative survey. Gynecol Oncol 2003;90:137-44.
6. Carpenter AB, Davey DD. ThinPrep Pap test: performance and biopsy follow up in a university hospital. Cancer 1999;87:105-12.
7. Cheung AN, Szeto EF, Leung BS, Khoo US, Ng AW. Liquid based cytology and conventional cervical smears: a comparison study in an Asian screening population. Cancer 2003;99:331-5.
8. Ashfaq R, Gibbons D, Vela C, Saboorian MH, Iliya F. ThinPrep Pap test. Accuracy for glandular disease. Acta Cytol 1999;43:81-5.
9. Fremont-Smith M, Marino J, Griffin B, Spencer L, Bolick D. Comparison of the SurePath liquid-based Papanicolaou smear with the conventional Papanicolaou smear in a multisite direct-to-vial study. Cancer 2004;102:269-79.
10. Arbyn M, Bergeron C, Klinkhamer P et al. Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:167-77.
11. Ronco G, Cuzick J, Pierotti P et al. Accuracy of liquid based versus conventional cytology: overall results of new technologies for cervical cancer screening: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007;335:28-31.
12. National Institute of Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of liquid-based cytology for cervical screening. Available at: (accessed 24 April 2010).
13. Williams AR. Liquid based cytology and conventional smears over two 12-month periods. Cytopathology 2006;17:82-5.
14. McQueen F. Duvall E. Using a quality control approach to define an "adequately cellular" liquid-based cervical cytology specimen. Cytopathology 2006;17:168-74.
15. Turnbull LS. North west quality assurance reference centre annual report. 2006-2007. Available at: (accessed 20 March 2010).