THE DETERMINATION OF PAPANICOLAOU SMEAR ADEQUACY USING A SEMIQUANTITATIVE METHOD TO EVALUATE CELLULARITY

被引:11
作者
VALENTE, PT
SCHANTZ, HD
TRABAL, JF
机构
[1] Departments of Pathology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas, Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas
关键词
CERVICOVAGINAL SMEARS; FALSE NEGATIVES; ENDOCERVICAL CELLS; ADEQUACY INDEX;
D O I
10.1002/dc.2840070606
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
To examine the influence of sample cellularity and the presence of endocervical columnar cells on the detection of cervical dysplasia, Papanicolaou (Pap) smears taken from patients with biopsy-proven CIN II and III were analyzed retrospectively. Adequacy was semiquantitated by dividing each smear into 15 equal areas using a lined template and assigning an adequacy index (AI) of 0 to 15. The total false-negative (FN) rate was 15.8 percent, with 6.1% representing interpretive error and 9.7% representing sampling error. For FN slides truly lacking abnormal cells, the average AI was significantly lower than that of true positives (TP), even when endocervical columnar cells were present. The entire group was then blindly re-evaluated using a subjective application of the Bethesda System, classifying slides as satisfactory, less than optimal, and unsatisfactory. Although correlation of AI with the rapid Bethesda System categorization was imperfect, the exclusion of less than optimal and unsatisfactory smears also lowered the FN rate, but less effectively. An AI scoring technique, therefore, may be useful in the routine evaluation of Pap smear adequacy.
引用
收藏
页码:576 / 580
页数:5
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
Husain OAN, Butler EB, Evans DMD, MacGregor JE, Yule R, Quality control in cervical cytology, J Clin Pathol, 27, pp. 935-944, (1974)
[2]  
Coppleson LW, Brown B, Estimation of the screening error rate from the observed detection rates in repeated cervical cytology, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 119, pp. 953-958, (1974)
[3]  
Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR, False negative results in cervical cytologic studies, Acta Cytologica, 29, pp. 1043-1046, (1985)
[4]  
Rohr LR, Quality assurance in gynecologic cytology, Am J Clin Pathol, 94, pp. 754-758, (1990)
[5]  
Lundberg GB, Quality assurance in cervical cytology, JAMA, 262, pp. 1672-1679, (1989)
[6]  
Lundberg GB, The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses, JAMA, 262, pp. 931-934, (1989)
[7]  
van der Graaf Y, Vooijs GP, Gaillard HLJ, Go DMDS, Screening error in cervical cytologic screening, Acta Cytologica, 31, pp. 434-438, (1987)
[8]  
Koss LG, The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection: a triumph and a tragedy, JAMA, 261, pp. 737-743, (1989)
[9]  
Fidler HK, Boyes DA, Worth AJ, Cervical cancer detection in British Columbia, BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 75, pp. 392-404, (1968)
[10]  
Christopherson WM, Parker JE, Mendez WM, Lundin FE, Cervix cancer death rates and mass cytologic screening, Cancer, 26, pp. 808-811, (1970)