Journal List > Korean J Cytopathol > v.19(2) > 1006513

Korean J Cytopathol. 2008 Sep;19(2):107-110. Korean.
Published online September 30, 2008.  https://doi.org/10.3338/kjc.2008.19.2.107
Copyright © 2008 The Korean Society for Cytopathology
The Usefulness of Cervicovaginal Cytology as a Primary Screening Test
Jae Hong Park, M.D., Seung Yeon Ha, M.D., Hyun Yee Cho, M.D., Dong Hae Chung, M.D., Na Rae Kim, M.D. and Sanghui Park, M.D.
Department of Pathology, Gachon University, Gil Hospital Incheon, Korea.
Received May 06, 2008; Accepted August 25, 2008.

Abstract

We evaluated the usefulness of cervicovaginal cytology as a primary screening test by analyzing the cytologic and histological diagnoses of 2,254 women. Cervicovaginal cytology had 93.0% sensitivity, 86.1% specificity, 88.2% positive predictive value, and 91.7% of negative predictive value. Cervicovaginal cytology as a primary screening test showed much higher specificity but slightly lower sensitivity than HPV DNA testing. However, the sensitivity of cervicovaginal cytology will be improved continuously due to the development of liquid-based cytology. We regard cervicovaginal cytology as a good primary screening test for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or carcinoma.

Keywords: Primary screening test; Cervicovaginal cytology; HPV

Tables


 Table 1
Correlation between PAP smear and surgical diagnosis
Click for larger image


Table 2
Specimen adequacy and surgical diagnosis in cytologically negative cases
Click for larger image


Table 3
Reasons for inadequacy and surgical diagnosis
Click for larger image

References
1. Ministry of health and welfare. Annual report of the central cancer registry in Korea. 2002.
2. Kulasingam SL, Hughes JP, Kiviat NB, et al. Evaluation of human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for cervical abnormalities: comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and frequency of referral. JAMA 2002;288:1749–1757.
3. Lee KC, Jung CK, Lee A, et al. A comparision of Surepath™ liquid-based smear with a conventional smear for cervicovaginal cytology-with reference to a histological diagnosis. Korean J Cytopathol 2007;18:20–28.
4. Screening for squamous cervical cancer: duration of low risk after negative results of cervical cytology and its implication for screening policies. IARC Working Group on evaluation of cervical cancer screening programmes. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1986;293:659–664.
5. Jeon SR, Cho HY, Jung HJ, Choi EK. Comparison of human papillomavirus DNA polymerase chain reaction with cervical cytology as a screening test for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Korean J Gynecol Oncol 2006;17:272–278.
6. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR. False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 1985;29:1043–1046.
7. Dodd LG, Sneige N, Villarreal Y, et al. Quality-assurance study of simultaneously sampled, non-correlating cervical cytology and biopsies. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:138–144.
8. Lim YK, Lim JC, Kim JH. Comparison of efficacy between MonoPrep® and papanicolaou smear for cervical cancer screening. Korean J Obstet Gynecol 2004;47:109–117.
9. Park JM, Lee JG, Suh IS. Clinical efficacy of manual liquid-based cervicovaginal cytology preparation: comparative study with conventional papanicolaou test. Korean J Cytopathol 2005;16:10–17.
10. Ho GY, Bierman R, Beardsley L, Chang CJ, Burk RD. Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women. N Engl J Med 1998;338:423–428.
11. Nobbenhuis MA, Helmerhorst TJ. Cytological regression and clearance of high-risk human papillomavirus in women with an abnormal cervical smear. Lancet 2001;358:1782–1783.
12. Kim MK, Sohn JH, Kim CH, Choi JS. The usefulness of concomitant high-risk human papillomavirus test and colposcopy in combination with the papanicolaou test in ASCUS patients. Korean J Cytopathol 2005;16:18–24.
TOOLS