We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Short interval between two Pap smears: effect on the result of the second smear? A prospective randomized trial.
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2017 June
PURPOSE: A repeat Pap smear is sometimes necessary after a short time interval or even immediately, when patients seek for a second opinion or due to study participation. Only limited information is available on the possible impact of a short interval between two Pap smears. Most institutions therefore practice a minimum time span of 6-8 weeks before obtaining a second smear since a short interval is commonly believed to be associated with an increase of false negative results in the second smear.
METHODS: Two consecutive Pap smears were obtained from 81 women. 41 smears were processed using the conventional technique, whereas liquid-based cytology was used in the remaining 40 women. Smears were independently evaluated by four different cytopathologists. We analyzed the effect of time interval, both processing techniques and inter-observer variance in cytological evaluation.
RESULTS: While the result of the second smear shows a tendency towards a more benign outcome (odds ratio (OR) 1.436, 95% CI 0.972-2.121), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.07). No significant differences were observed between conservative and liquid-based cytology (OR 1.554, 95% CI 0.659-3.667, p = 0.31). There was considerable inter-observer variability, and the observer was a strong predictor of the cytological result (OR 0.632-5.083, 95% CI 0.355-8.975, p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: We document a tendency towards a more benign outcome without statistical significance in the second smear. Inter-observer variability of different cytopathologists is high and should be kept in mind when evaluating cytology results.
METHODS: Two consecutive Pap smears were obtained from 81 women. 41 smears were processed using the conventional technique, whereas liquid-based cytology was used in the remaining 40 women. Smears were independently evaluated by four different cytopathologists. We analyzed the effect of time interval, both processing techniques and inter-observer variance in cytological evaluation.
RESULTS: While the result of the second smear shows a tendency towards a more benign outcome (odds ratio (OR) 1.436, 95% CI 0.972-2.121), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.07). No significant differences were observed between conservative and liquid-based cytology (OR 1.554, 95% CI 0.659-3.667, p = 0.31). There was considerable inter-observer variability, and the observer was a strong predictor of the cytological result (OR 0.632-5.083, 95% CI 0.355-8.975, p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: We document a tendency towards a more benign outcome without statistical significance in the second smear. Inter-observer variability of different cytopathologists is high and should be kept in mind when evaluating cytology results.
Full text links
Related Resources
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
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