Liquid compared with conventional cervical cytology - A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:297
作者
Arbyn, Marc [1 ]
Bergeron, Christine
Klinkhamer, Paul
Martin-Hirsch, Pierre
Siebers, Albertus G.
Bulten, Johan
机构
[1] Sci Inst Publ Hlth, Canc Epidemiol Unit, Brussels, Belgium
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.AOG.0000296488.85807.b3
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To compare test performance characteristics of conventional Pap tests and liquid-based cervical cytology samples. DATA SOURCES: Eligible studies, published between 1991 and 2007 were retrieved through PubMed/EmBase searching and completed by consultation of other sources. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Studies were selected if a conventional and a liquid-based sample were prepared from the same woman or when one or the other type of sample was taken from a separate but similar cohort. The current systematic review and meta-analysis is restricted to studies where all subjects were submitted to gold standard verification, based on colposcopy and histology of colposcopy-targeted biopsies, allowing computation of absolute and relative test validity for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse. Randomized trials were selected as well if all test-positive cases were verified with the same gold standard, allowing computation of the relative sensitivity. Impact of study characteristics on accuracy was assessed by subgroup meta-analyses, meta-regression, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve regression. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: The relative sensitivity, pooled from eight studies, with complete gold standard verification and from one randomized clinical trial, did not differ significantly from unity. Also, the specificity, considering high-grade and lowgrade squamous intraepithelial lesions as cutoff, was similar in conventional and liquid cytology. However, a lower pooled specificity was found for liquid-based cytology when presence of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance was the cutoff (ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.84-0.98). Differences in study characteristics did not explain interstudy heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Liquid-based cervical cytology is neither more sensitive nor more specific for detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia compared with the conventional Pap test.
引用
收藏
页码:167 / 177
页数:11
相关论文
共 64 条
  • [51] Richart R M, 1973, Pathol Annu, V8, P301
  • [52] RONCO G, 2007, BMJ-BRIT MED J, P335
  • [53] A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations
    Rutter, CM
    Gatsonis, CA
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2001, 20 (19) : 2865 - 2884
  • [54] New technologies in cervical cytology screening: A word of caution
    Sawaya, GF
    Grimes, DA
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 94 (02) : 307 - 310
  • [55] COMPARING NEW AND OLD SCREENING-TESTS WHEN A REFERENCE PROCEDURE CANNOT BE PERFORMED ON ALL SCREENEES - EXAMPLE OF AUTOMATED CYTOMETRY FOR EARLY DETECTION OF CERVICAL-CANCER
    SCHATZKIN, A
    CONNOR, RJ
    TAYLOR, PR
    BUNNAG, B
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1987, 125 (04) : 672 - 678
  • [56] Shepherd J, 2000, Health Technol Assess, V4, P1
  • [57] Sherman ME, 1997, CANCER CYTOPATHOL, V81, P89
  • [58] Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology - A proposal for reporting
    Stroup, DF
    Berlin, JA
    Morton, SC
    Olkin, I
    Williamson, GD
    Rennie, D
    Moher, D
    Becker, BJ
    Sipe, TA
    Thacker, SB
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (15): : 2008 - 2012
  • [59] Sulik SM, 2001, J FAM PRACTICE, V50, P1040
  • [60] Sutton AJ., 2000, METHODS METAANALYSIS, DOI DOI 10.1002/SIM.1565