			Home About us Contact

High-grade Abnormalities (high-grade + abnormality)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

P-11 THE IMPACT OF INTRODUCING LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY INTO A ROUTINE SCREENING LABORATORY

CYTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 2006
L. Gregory
With the exception of information from the liquid based cytology (LBC) pilot site there has been limited data to date on the impact of the introduction of SurePathÔ LBC in the NHSCSP. We will present data to show the impact on a medium sized laboratory (42 000 requests per annum) over the first phases of rollout. Data from before, during and post conversion, a period of 28 months, shows the following trends: (1) A significant fall in the inadequate rate (2) A slight decrease in the borderline / mild dyskaryosis rate (3) A small increase in the high-grade squamous dyskaryosis reporting rate (4) An increase in both the number and specificity of glandular lesions reported (5) A largely unchanged positive predictive value for high-grade abnormalities (6) A significant increase in laboratory productivity, unrelated to inadequate rate but through increased speed of screening. Although our experience is not directly comparable to the experience of the LBC pilot, our observations may well reflect that we were fortunate to be trained by staff from one of the LBC sites and thereby benefited directly from their experience. [source]

Laboratory performance measures: evidence against low-risk women explaining low detection rates of high-grade abnormalities.

CYTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 4 2006
Updated cancer information
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: the quality control method of choice?

CYTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 4 2002
D. BROOKE
Rapid rescreening of all negative and inadequate smears is the quality control method of choice in the UK. The sensitivity of primary screening of laboratory and individual screeners are major indicators of screening quality and are dependent on the number of false negative smears found by rapid screening for their calculation. High sensitivity may indicate good quality primary screening or poor quality rapid review. Quantifiably high quality rapid rescreening is essential if these sensitivity figures are to be meaningful. A 12-month study was undertaken in routine practice using the prescreening mode to ascertain the sensitivity of rapid (partial) screening in our department . The final results of smears were compared with those of rapid prescreening. The calculated sensitivity ranged from 92,54% for high-grade abnormalities and 75,33% for all grades, revealing a wide range of performance between individual prescreeners. Rapid prescreening can identify individuals best suited to rapid screening in routine practice. By using these prescreeners only, the sensitivity of cervical screening could be raised. Rapid (partial) prescreening should be considered as the quality control method of choice. [source]

Outcome in women with no endocervical component on cervical cytology after treatment for high-grade cervical dysplasia

AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 4 2009
Alice HUANG
Background:, Cervical cancer and its precursors still remain an important cause of morbidity and mortality despite adequate screening programs. It is now established practice in Australia that a Pap smear without an endocervical component, which is otherwise negative, does not warrant an earlier repeat smear. This study aims to determine if the lack of an endocervical component in women with previously treated high-grade abnormalities of the cervix increases the risk of subsequent cytological abnormalities. Method:, Data were retrieved from an electronic database in the Oncology and Dysplasia Unit at The Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Women who underwent treatment for high-grade cervical abnormalities from 2000,2004 were included in the study. Women with negative cytology immediately after their operations were first identified, and the incidence of subsequent cytological abnormalities was calculated and then separated according to their endocervical status. Results:, Of the 1260 women in the study population, seven developed high-grade abnormalities (six with an endocervical component and one without) and 107 developed low-grade abnormalities (98 with an endocervical component and nine without). Conclusion:, The lack of an endocervical component was not statistically significantly associated with a higher incidence of either high-grade or low-grade abnormalities. Therefore, women who have had previous treatments for high-grade abnormalities do not need to have earlier repeat smears or intervention if the cytology lacks an endocervical component. [source]

A randomised comparison of SurePath liquid-based cytology and conventional smear cytology in a colposcopy clinic setting

BJOG : AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, Issue 11 2008
PH Sykes
Objective, The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity of cervical cytology using conventional smears and SurePath liquid-based cytology (LBC). Design, Prospective randomised evaluation of diagnostic test. Setting, A single institution colposcopy clinic. Population, Women attending first visit colposcopy appointments were offered entry into the study. Methods, Cervical cytology samples from 913 women of age 16,75 years were randomly processed as SurePath LBC or conventional smears. Conventional smears were taken for 453 women and a SurePath LBC taken for 451 women. Cytology results were correlated with colposcopic findings and histology from colposcopic biopsies, treatment and follow up. Main outcome measures, To compare the sensitivity of SurePath LBC and conventional smears for histologically proven abnormality. Other outcome measures include a comparison of their sensitivity for high-grade abnormalities and their satisfactory rate. Results, Accounting for all randomised samples, there was a trend towards improved sensitivity for SurePath LBC (79.1 versus 73.7%, P = 0.1). However, excluding unsatisfactory cytology (and samples not taken) eliminated this trend; the sensitivity for both LBC and conventional smears for any epithelial abnormality was 81%. With a threshold of atypical squamous cells of uncertain significance (ASC-US), both SurePath LBC and conventional smears had a sensitivity of 92% for high-grade lesions. SurePath LBC was less likely to be reported as unsatisfactory (2.7 versus 9.1%, P < 0.0001). Conclusions, In this context, with a threshold of ASC-US, both SurePath LBC and conventional smears offer high sensitivity for the detection of CIN2/3, but SurePath LBC is less likely to be reported as unsatisfactory. [source]