Comparison of Unsatisfactory Samples from Conventional Smear versus Liquid-Based Cytology in Uterine Cervical Cancer Screening Test

Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 2017³â 51±Ç 3È£ p.314 ~ p.319

Á¤È¸¼±(Jeong Hoi-Seon) - Korea University College of Medicine Department of Pathology
È«¼º¶õ(Hong Sung-Ran) - Dankook University College of Medicine Cheil General Hospital and Women¡¯s Healthcare Center Department of Pathology
ä½Â¿Í(Chae Seoung-Wan) - Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine Kangbuk Samsung Hospital Department of Pathology
Áø¼Ò¿µ(Jin So-Young) - Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine Soonchunhyang University Hospital Department of Pathology
À±Çý°æ(Yoon Hye-Kyoung) - Inje University College of Medicine Busan Paik Hospital Department of Pathology
ÀÌÁÖÈñ(Lee Ju-Hie) - Kyung Hee University School of Medicine Department of Pathology
±èÀº°æ(Kim Eun-Kyung) - Eulji General Hospital Department of Pathology
(Ha Sook-Tai) - T&C Diagnostic Pathology Clinic
±è¼º³²(Kim Sung-Nam) - Samkwang Medical Laboratories
¹ÚÀºÁ¤(Park Eun-Jung) - Foryou Pathology Laboratories
Á¤Á¾Àç(Jung Jong-Jae) - Foryou Pathology Laboratories
¼º¼øÈñ(Sung Sun-Hee) - Ewha Womans University School of Medicine Department of Pathology
ÀÓ¼ºÃ¶(Lim Seung-Cheoul) - Chosun University School of Medicine Department of Pathology

Abstract

Background: Cervical cytology for uterine cervical cancer screening has transitioned from conventional smear (CS) to liquid-based cytology (LBC), which has many advantages. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of unsatisfactory specimens from CS versus LBC at multiple institutions including general hospitals and commercial laboratories.

Methods: Each participating institution provided a minimum of 500 Papanicolaou (Pap) test results for analysis. Pap tests were classified according to the participating institution (commercial laboratory or general hospital) and the processing method (CS, ThinPrep, SurePath, or CellPrep). The causes of unsatisfactory results were classified as technical problems, scant cellularity, or complete obscuring factors.

Results: A total of 38,956 Pap test results from eight general hospitals and three commercial laboratories were analyzed. The mean unsatisfactory rate of LBC was significantly lower than that of CS (1.26% and 3.31%, p = .018). In the LBC method, samples from general hospitals had lower unsatisfactory rates than those from commercial laboratories (0.65% vs 2.89%, p = .006). The reasons for unsatisfactory results were heterogeneous in CS. On the other hand, 66.2% of unsatisfactory results in LBC were due to the scant cellularity.

Conclusions: Unsatisfactory rate of cervical cancer screening test results varies according to the institution and the processing method. LBC has a significantly lower unsatisfactory rate than CS.

Å°¿öµå

Papanicolaou test, Cervical cytology, Unsatisfactory, Liquid-based cytology, Conventional smear
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed ´ëÇÑÀÇÇÐȸ ȸ¿ø 
ÁÖÁ¦ÄÚµå
ÁÖÁ¦¸í(Target field)
¿¬±¸´ë»ó(Population)
¿¬±¸Âü¿©(Sample size)
´ë»ó¼ºº°(Gender)
Áúº´Æ¯¼º(Condition Category)
¿¬±¸È¯°æ(Setting)
¿¬±¸¼³°è(Study Design)
¿¬±¸±â°£(Period)
ÁßÀç¹æ¹ý(Intervention Type)
ÁßÀç¸íĪ(Intervention Name)
Å°¿öµå(Keyword)
À¯È¿¼º°á°ú(Recomendation)
The mean unsatisfactory rate of LBC was significantly lower than that of CS (1.26% and 3.31%, p = .018). In the LBC method, samples from general hospitals had lower unsatisfactory rates than those from commercial laboratories (0.65% vs 2.89%, p = .006).
¿¬±¸ºñÁö¿ø(Fund Source)
±Ù°Å¼öÁØÆò°¡(Evidence Hierarchy)
ÃâÆdz⵵(Year)
Âü¿©ÀúÀÚ¼ö(Authors)
´ëÇ¥ÀúÀÚ
KCDÄÚµå
ICD 03
°Ç°­º¸ÇèÄÚµå