Evaluation of a New Automated Processing System (TACAS™ Pro) for Liquid-Based Procedures

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate a fully automated processing system (TACAS™ Pro) for liquid-based procedures (LBPs). Methods and Materials: Materials were 3,483 and additionally 502 specimens that were taken at Kanagawa Health Service Association. Specimens obtained with a Cervex-Brush® were first smeared to glass slides using one side of the brush and then processed to TACAS Pro. Results: (1) The microscopy watching time per normal case was 3.65 ± 0.85 min in the conventional procedure, whereas in the LBP it was 1.95 ± 0.60 min, and the latter reduced workload to 53%. (2) The handling time of TACAS Pro per day was 2 h and 25.8 min. The workload at a laboratory offset it and revealed the work saving to be 63.8%. (3) Unsatisfactory rates were 0% in the conventional procedure, whereas in the LBP it was 1.88% at first. The latter rate decreased to 0.5% after system improvement. (4) Specimens which may disturb microscopy analysis were found in 1.06%, including 3 cases of possible carry-over of cells to the following slides. An additional study with the revised system confirmed no carry-over. (5) Incidences of abnormal cytology were consistent between the two methods. Conclusions: The revised automated processing system TACAS Pro is a feasible and useful LBP and reduces the workload of cytology laboratories.

Cytological Characteristics of Endometrial Phasing Using the Specimens Prepared with the Liquid-Based Procedure: Comparison with the Conventional Procedure

“…These findings are similar to those for cervical cytology [11,12,13]. Kuramoto et al [11] reported that cells prepared with LBP shrunk by approximately 5% when granulocytes were compared in the specimens of both procedures.…”

“…Liquid-based procedures (LBP) [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13] for cervical cytology have become more widely used. This may be due to the clear cytological specimens obtained by the automated processing system in the limited field of glass slides.…”

Frequency of unsatisfactory cervical cytology smears in cancer screening of Japanese women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…After full‐text screening, 11 publications were excluded: five studies that did not adopt TBS, two studies that evaluated partially overlapping participants, one that assessed data from unclear settings, one that assessed data from hospital settings, one that assessed data from laboratory settings, and one review without original data. Finally, 17 studies (three direct, eight indirect, and one both comparison studies between CC and LBC, and five studies assessing CC only) including 1 497 451 unique healthy women were eligible.…”

“…No studies explicitly reported whether participants were prospectively enrolled or whether data were retrospectively assessed. Only three studies reported that the investigators consecutively evaluated the smear samples from a group of eligible subjects; the other 14 studies did not describe the consecutiveness of the assessed smear results. Eight studies were based on a single center's experience, whereas the other seven studies collected and assessed the pertinent data from multiple institutions (two studies not described).…”

“…The sample size varied and ranged from 384 to 615 231. Only five studies reported the average age of study participants, which ranged from 39 to 53 years. The reported proportion of screening positives, defined as “atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance “ or worse results, ranged between 1.5% and 5.3%; invasive cancer was in general reported in 0.1% or fewer subjects.…”