International terminology of colposcopy: an updated report from the international federation for cervical pathology and colposcopy

Objective: To evaluate the performance of rapid prescreening (RPS) and 100% rapid review (RR-100%) as internal quality control (IQC) methods assessed by outcome at colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology for cases with false-negative results on cervical cytopathology at routine screening (RS). Study Design: Out of 12,208 cytology smears analyzed, 900 were abnormal. Of these, 656 were identified at RS, and 244 were false-negative, with 90.2% identified at RPS and 57.4% at RR-100%. Of the 900 abnormal cases, 436 were submitted for additional testing. Results: Of the 244 women with cytopathological abnormalities identified only by the IQC methods, 114 had supplementary examinations: 35 were submitted for colposcopy, 22 for biopsy and 99 for repeat cytopathology. The sensitivity of RPS for the detection of abnormalities identified on colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology was 87.5% (95% CI 67.6-97.3), 82.4% (95% CI 56.6-96.2) and 95.7% (95% CI 85.2-99.5), respectively. The sensitivity of RR-100% was 54.2% (95% CI 32.8-74.4), 52.9% (95% CI 27.8-77.0) and 47.8% (95% CI 32.9-63.1), respectively. RPS was more sensitive than RR-100% when compared to the findings on colposcopy (p = 0.011) and repeat cytopathology (p = 0.000). When compared to colposcopy, histopathology and repeat cytopathology, the sensitivity of RS was 83.2% (95% CI 76.1-88.9), 85.7% (95% CI 78.1-91.5) and 73.3% (95% CI 66.0-79.7), respectively. Conclusion: RPS performed better than RR-100% when compared to the results of colposcopy and repeat cytopathology.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Internal Quality Control for Cervical Cytopathology: Comparison of Potential False-Negatives Detected at Rapid Prescreening and at 100% Rapid Review

Tavares¹,

Souza²,

Manrique³

et al. 2014

“…The classification of the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy, which was approved in 2002 and recommended by the Brazilian Association of Genitoscopy, was used for the colposcopic evaluations [15]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Fournier® Cervical Specimen Self-Sampling Device Using the Papanicolaou Method

Rocha

Meurer

et al. 2012

Introduction: Communities of socially excluded immigrant women, especially Muslim, Asian, Aboriginal and Maroon, are among the groups of women with low rates of cervical screening. Exclusion of the pelvic examination could result in a higher acceptance of the cervical screening among these communities and an increase in screening coverage. Aim: To assess the performance of the Fournier® cervical specimen self-sampling device for the cytological diagnosis of precursor or neoplastic lesions in the uterine cervix using the Papanicolaou method. Methods: A case-control study was conducted at the Cervical Pathology Outpatient Clinic. Liquid-based cytology slides were obtained by the Fournier device and stained using the Papanicolaou method. The slides were analyzed by two pathologists, blinded for the colposcopic and histological results and compared to Papanicolaou smears that were obtained using the traditional method of speculum examination. Results: There were 68 patients who were considered free from precursor or neoplastic cervical lesions. There were 35 cases of low-grade lesions, 13 cases of high-grade lesions and 3 cases of squamous-cell carcinoma. According to the first and second pathologists, the sensitivities of the device for identifying precursor or neoplastic cervical lesions were 50.0 and 60.0%, and the specificities of the method were 81.8 and 73.8%. According to the first and second pathologists, the positive predictive values of the diagnostic test were 0.67 and 0.63, and the negative predictive values were 0.68 and 0.71, respectively. Conclusion: Sensitivity and specificity of the Fournier device test was comparable to Papanicolaou smears tests obtained using the traditional method with speculum examination.

“…The mucopurulent cervicitis of chlamydia and gonorrhea is associated with prominent vascularity and hypertrophy of the cervical ectropion. Thus, it is recommended to start treatment before biopsy when any cervicitis or severe vaginitis is strongly suspected [12,13]. Traditionally, only a single-tissue punch biopsy is obtained from the most abnormal appearing area.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation Discrepancies between High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions and High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Cytological/Histological Correlation Study from a Single-Institution Experience

Zhang

Carrozza²,

Huang³

2013

Objective: Previous studies have demonstrated diagnostic discrepancies for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3) from previously confirmed cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). The goal of this study is to investigate the possible factors which may be responsible for this diagnostic discrepancy. Study Design: The study included all the cytological specimens diagnosed with a HSIL by the Papanicolaou (Pap) test at Temple University Hospital (2000-2010) as well as timely follow-up cervical biopsies. The biopsy tissue types and diagnoses were subsequently categorized and analyzed. Results: Of the total 842 Pap tests with HSIL diagnosis, 96 cases (11.4%) showed non-CIN 2/3 in follow-up cervical biopsies. Among those cases, the most common biopsy diagnoses were cervicitis (27.9%) and CIN 1 (25%). Endocervical curettage (ECC) samples showed a high percentage of inadequacy for diagnosis (43.7%). Thirty-seven cases had subsequent follow-up biopsy, and CIN 2/3 was found in 15 cases. However, none of the CIN 2/3 cases was detected by ECC sampling. Conclusions: Our study indicated that the discrepant correlation between HSIL and CIN 2/3 was most likely due to tissue sampling issues during colposcopic examination. The diagnostic value of ECC remains poor for the detection and grading of cervical intraepithelial dysplasia.