Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention (아시아태평양암예방학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Cervical Cell Morphology Using Two Different Cytology Techniques for Early Detection of Pre-Cancerous Lesions

  • Published : 2014.01.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Cervical cancer is an issue of foremost importance globally, specifically affecting the developing nations. Significant advances have taken place with regard to diagnosis of cervical cancer, especially with screening. Appropriate screening measures can thus reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. The most desirable screening technique should be less invasive, easy to perform, cost-effective and cover a wide range of diagnostic icons. Manual liquid based cytology (MLBC) can be considered as one of the suitable technique for screening with the above-mentioned benefits. The aim of the current study was to compare two cervical screening techniques on the basis of different morphological parameters and staining parameters by using modified acetic acid Pap staining to see the possibility of reducing time economy involved in conventional Pap staining (CPS). The study was conducted on a total 88 cases and all were analyzed with both MLBC and CPS. Forty eight cases that were regarded as satisfactory on the basis of Bethesda system by both methods were further recruited for investigation. Their morphological parameters and staining quality were compared and scored according to a scoring system defined in the study. Quality indices was calculated for both staining procedures and smear techniques.

Keywords

References

  1. Afaf T, Elnashar, Hazem M, Abdel G (2012). The use of cytology tests in the diagnosis of cervical lesions in high risk patients. Med J, 80, 125-32.
  2. Alves VA, Bibbo M, Schmitt FC, Milanezi F, et al (2004). Comparison of manual and automated methods of liquid based cytology: A morphological study. Acta Cytol, 48, 187-93. https://doi.org/10.1159/000326314
  3. Bergeron C, Fagnani F (2003). Performance of a new liquidbased cervical screening technique in the clinical setting of a large French laboratory. Acta Cytol, 47, 753-61. https://doi.org/10.1159/000326601
  4. Bibbo M (1991). Comprehensive Cytopathology: Saunders W B (3rd ed), Philadelphia, pp 881-906.
  5. Biswas RR, Chandi C, Paral, et al (2008). Rapid economic, acetic acid, Papanicolaou stain (REAP)-Is it suitable alternative to standard PAP stain? J Med Sci, 199-103.
  6. Blanks RG, Moss SM, Coleman DA, et al (2007). An examination of the role of opportunistic smear taking in the NHS cervical screening programme using data from the CSEU cervical screening cohort study. BJOG, 114, 1408-13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01467.x
  7. Burd EM (2003). Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Clin Microbiol Rev, 16, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.16.1.1-17.2003
  8. Canfell K, Sitas F, Beral V (2006). Cervical cancer in Australia and the United Kingdom: comparison of screening policy and uptake, and cancer incidence and mortality. Med J Aust, 185, 482-6.
  9. Celik C, Gezginc K, Toy H et al (2008). A comparison of liquidbased cytology with conventional cytology. Int J Gynecol Obste, 100, 163-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.07.023
  10. Chaudhry S, Fink A, Gelberg L, et al (2003). Utilization of Pap smears by south Asian women living in the United States. J Gen Int Med, 18, 377-84. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20427.x
  11. Chih-Ming H, Tsai-Yen C, Shih-hung H et al (2004). Multivariate analysis of the prognostic factors and outcomes in early cervical cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Gynecologic Oncol, 93, 458-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.01.026
  12. Deshou H, Changhua W, Quiyan L (2009). Clinical utility of Liquid Prep cytology system for primary cervical cancer screening in a large urban hospital setting in China. J Cytol, 26, 20-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9371.54863
  13. Dighe SB, Dulhan A, Saleem P, et al (2006). Chinoy R. Papanicolaou Stain,Is it Economical to switch torapid, economical acetic acid, papanicolaou stain? Acta Cytologica. 50, 643-6 https://doi.org/10.1159/000326034
  14. Dwivedi N, Agarwal A, Raj V, et al (2012). Comparison of centrifuged liquid based cytology method with conventional brush cytology in oral lesions. Eur J Gen Dent, 1, 192-6 https://doi.org/10.4103/2278-9626.105386
  15. Ferlay J, Shin H, Bray F, et al (2012). Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer, 127, 2893-917.
  16. Garbar C, Mascaux C, Fontaine V (2005). Efficiency of an inexpensive liquid-based cytology performed by cytocentrifugation: A comparative study using the histology as reference standard. Cyto J, 2, 15
  17. Gupta A, Kumar A, Stewart DE (2002). Cervical cancer screening among South Asian women in Canada: the role of education and acculturation. Health Care Women Int, 23, 123-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/073993302753429004
  18. Hewitt M, Devesa SS, Breen N (2004). Cervical cancer screening among U.S. women: analyses of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Prev Med, 39, 270-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.03.035
  19. Hicks ML, Stephanie Y, Roland M, et al (2006). Groesbeck P. Disparities in cervical cancer screening, treatment and outcomes. Ethnicity Disease, 16, 63-6.
  20. Idris AA, Hussain MS (2009). Comparison of the efficacy of three stains used for the detection of cytological changes in Sudanese females with breast lumps. Sudanese J Pub Hlth, 4, 275-77
  21. Johnson T, Maksem JA, Belsheim BL, et al (2000). Liquid- based cervical-cell collection with brushes and wooden spatulas: a comparison of 100 conventional smears from high-risk women to liquid-fixed cytocentrifuge slides, demonstrating a cost-effective, alternative monolayer slide preparation method. Diagn Cytopathol, 22, 86-91. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0339(200002)22:2<86::AID-DC5>3.0.CO;2-4
  22. Judy M et al (2006). Validation of a low-cost, liquid based screening method for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Am J Obstetrics Gynecol, 195, 965-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.02.001
  23. Kavatkar AN, Nagwamshi CA, Dabaks M (2008). Study of a manual method of liquid based cervical cytology. Indian J Pathol Microbiol, 59, 190-4.
  24. King A, Clay K, Felmar EG, et al (1992). The Papanicolaou Smear. West J Med, 156, 202-4.
  25. Maksem JA, Dhanwada V, Trueblood JE, et al (2006). Testing automated liquid based cytology samples with a manual liquid based cytology method using residual cell suspensions from 500 Thin Prep cases. Diagn Cytopathol, 34, 391-6. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.20466
  26. Maksem JA, Finnemore M, Belsheim BL, et al (2001). Manual method for liquied-based cytology: A demonstra-tion using 1000 gynecological cytologies collected directly to a vial and prepared by a smear-slide technique. Diagn Cytopatholo, 25, 334-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.2166
  27. Nandini NM, Nandish SM, Pallavi P, et al (2012). Manual liquid based cytology in primary screening for cervical cancer - a cost effective preposition for scarce resource settings. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 13, 3645-51. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2012.13.8.3645
  28. Nygard JF, Skare GB, Thoresen S (2002). The cervical cancer screening program in Norway, 1992-2000, changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer. J Med Screen, 9, 86-91. https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.9.2.86
  29. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al (2002). Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin, 55, 74-108.
  30. Sardar ZI (2008) . Perceptions and practices of a Pakistani population regarding cervical cancer screening. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 9, 42-4.
  31. Sato M et al (2004). A modified rapid Papanicolaou stain for imprint smear. Acta Cytol, 48, 461-62.
  32. Sherwani RK, Khan T, Aktar K (2007). Conventional pap smear and liquid based cytology for cervical cancer screening-A comparative study. J Cytol, 24, 167-72. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-9371.41888
  33. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al (2002). The 2001 Bethesda System terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA, 287, 2114-9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.16.2114
  34. Sutton GC, Storer A, Rowe K (2004). Cancer screening coverage of south Asian women in Wakefield. J Med Screen, 8, 183-6.
  35. Xian WJ (2011). Cervical cancer screening: Less testing, smarter testing. Cleveland Clin J Med, 78, 737-47. https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.78a.11033

Cited by

  1. Understanding and Responsiveness Level about Cervical Cancer and its Avoidance among Young Women of Pakistan vol.15, pp.12, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.12.4877
  2. Incidental Finding of Abnormal Cervical Pathology in Hysterectomy Specimens after Normal Preoperative Papanicolaou Smears in Thammasat University Hospital vol.15, pp.14, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.14.5811
  3. Population-Based Cervical Screening Outcomes in Turkey over a Period of Approximately Nine and a Half Years with Emphasis on Results for Women Aged 30-34 vol.15, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.5.2069
  4. Manual Liquid Based Cytology for Pap Smear Preparation and HPV Detection by PCR in Pakistan vol.16, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.2.579
  5. Update knowledge on cervical cancer incidence and prevalence in Asia vol.16, pp.9, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.9.3617
  6. Comparison of 3 corneal cytology collection methods for evaluating equine ulcerative keratitis: Cytobrush, kimura platinum spatula, and handle edge of scalpel blade pp.14635216, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/vop.12574