Journals / GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 3

Distribution of Pathologic Smear Results and Histopathologic Agreement in Precancerous Cervical Lesions

Pages
214–219
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, the prevalence of cytologic abnor-malities was 2.43%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVES: The accuracy of the Papanicolau smear test is very important in cervical cancer which is preventable cancer.
📊
Key Findings & Data:STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study was performed at the gynecology obstetrics and pathology de-partment of Baskent University Konya Application and Research Hospital, over a 5-year period.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the prevalence of cytologic abnor-malities was 2.43%.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

OBJECTIVES: The accuracy of the Papanicolau smear test is very important in cervical cancer which is preventable cancer. In this study, we aimed to investigate the distribution of smear results and cyto-histopathological correlation and agreement in biopsies. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study was performed at the gynecology obstetrics and pathology de-partment of Baskent University Konya Application and Research Hospital, over a 5-year period. The histopathology results of 89 patients who underwent colposcopic biopsy from 273 patients with patho-logic Pap smear results were examined. The histopathologic results and pathologic Pap smear results were compared and the compatibility between them was examined. RESULTS: Data records were collected for 11,191 women. Overall, the prevalence of cytologic abnor-malities was 2.43%. The cytohistopathologic correlation in epithelial lesions was 56% and was statisti-cally significant. In glandular lesions, normal biopsy results were reported in 93% of AGC-NOS cytology results, whereas there was a 100% malignancy correlation with AGC-FN cytology results. In terms of de-tecting low and high-grade lesions, the false-negative rate was 12% and the false-positive rate was 17%. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, Pap smears can be less cost-effective and easily accessible method. While conservative treatment is appropriate in young patients because of possible regression even in high-grade lesions; in older patients, it should not be hesitated to get biopsy when a suspicious clinic is present.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇOLAK, E., COŞKUNOĞLU, E. Z. (2020). Distribution of Pathologic Smear Results and Histopathologic Agreement in Precancerous Cervical Lesions. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 3, 214–219. https://ajindex.com/articles/227526

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Allameh T, Afsharmoghadam N. Management of atypical squamous cell on cervical cytology. Iran J Gynecol Oncol, 2009;2,43-53 2. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2006.
  2. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: American Cancer Society;2006. 3. Kripke C. Pap smear vs. HPV screening test for cervical cancer. Am Fam Physician. 2008;77(12):1740-42 4. Bidus MA, Elkas JC. Cervical and Vaginal Cancer. In: Berek JS, editors. Berek & Novak’s Gynecology. 2007; 14th ed. Philadelphia: Williams and Wilkins. 1404-56 5. Verhoef VM, Heideman DA, van Kemenade FJ, Rozendaal L, Bosgraaf RP, Hesselink AT, et al. Methylation marker analysis and HPV16/18 genotyping in high-risk HPV positive self-sam- pled specimens to identify women with high grade CIN or cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;135(1):58-63. doi: 10.1016/j. ygyno.2014.08.003 6. Anttila A, Ronco G, Clifford G, Bray F, Hakama M, Arbyn M, et al. Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes and policies in 18 European countries. Br J Cancer. 2004; 91(5):935-41. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602069 7. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Guide to clinical preventive services, 2008. Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. [Online] 2009 [Cited 2013 May20). Available from: URL: http://www. pacificcancer.org/pacp-resources/key-cancer-publications/ Guide-to-Clinical-Preventive- Services.pdf 8. Massad LS, Jeronimo J, Hormuzd AK, Schiffman M. The accuracy of colposcopic grading for detection of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. J Low Genital Tract Dis. 2009;13(3):137-44. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e 31819308d4. 9. Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, Kehoe S, Flannelly G, Mitrou S, et al. Management of minor cervical cytological abnormalities: a systematic review and a metaanalysis of the literature. Cancer Treat Rev. 2007;33 (6):514-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2007.05.002. 10. Shafi MI, Luesley DM, Jordan JA, Dunn JA, Rollason TP, Yates M. Randomised trial of immediate versus deferred treatment strategies for the management of minor cervical cytological abnormalities. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997; 104(5):590-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997. tb11538.x. 11. Sigurdsson K, Sigvaldason H. Longitudinal trends in cervical cytological lesions and the effect of risk factors. A 30-year overview. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85 (3):350-8. doi: 10.1080/00016340500432465. 12. Turkish Cervical Cancer and Cervical Cytology Research Group. Prevalence of cervical cytological abnormalities in Turkey. Int J Gynaecol Obstet.