Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparative study of the results from conventional cervico-vaginal oncotic cytology and liquid-based cytology.

Einstein 2012 October
OBJECTIVE: To compare two oncotic cervical cytology techniques, the conventional and the liquid-based cytology, in low risk patients for uterine cervical cancer.

METHODS: Comparative prospective study with 100 patients who came to their annual gynecological exam, and were submitted simultaneously to both techniques. We used the McNemar test, with a significance level of p < 0.05 to compare the results obtained related to adequacy of the smear quality, descriptive diagnosis prevalence, guided biopsy confirmation and histology.

RESULTS: Adequacy of the smear was similar for both methods. The quality with squamocolumnar junction in 93% of conventional cytology and in 84% of the liquid-based cytology had statistical significance. As for the diagnosis of atypical cells they were detected in 3% of conventional cytology and in 10% of liquid-based cytology (p = 0.06). Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance were the most prevalent abnormality. The liquid-based cytology performance was better when compared with colposcopy (guided biopsy), presenting sensitivity of 66.7% and specificity of 100%. There was no cytological and histological concordance for the conventional cytology.

CONCLUSIONS: Liquid-based cytology had a better performance to diagnose atypical cells and the cytohistological concordance was higher than in the conventional cytology.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app