Literature DB >> 12509093

Use of visual screening methods for cervical cancer screening.

Thomas C Wright1, Lynette Denny, Louise Kuhn, Sue Goldie.   

Abstract

This article has considered recent advances in visual screening methods. Devices that use electro-optical sensors offer great potential in various clinical roles, but considerable additional work is required to develop these devices and it is unlikely that they will come into widespread clinical use in the next 5 years. In contrast numerous studies, demonstrate that simple visual screening methods, such as DVI, have a sensitivity for the detection of women with biopsy-confirmed high-grade SIL (CIN 2,3) and cancer that is equivalent to that of conventional cervical cytology. The primary disadvantage of the simple visual screening methods is poor specificity. These methods classify up to 30% of all women screened as being test positive and as a result new strategies toward managing DVI positive women must be developed before simple visual screening methods can be adopted for routine screening. Enhanced visual methods that use cervicography and speculoscopy may be more specific and improve detection of biopsy-confirmed SIL, but the added time and expense to perform either of these methodologies must be considered and justified. Currently numerous studies are evaluating the best strategies for incorporating visual screening methods into cervical cancer screening programs. In the near future we should be able to determine whether these approaches should be incorporated into routine clinical care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12509093     DOI: 10.1016/s0889-8545(02)00045-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am        ISSN: 0889-8545            Impact factor:   2.844


  6 in total

1.  Double jeopardy: HIV and cervical cancer in Indian women.

Authors:  V Sahasrabuddhe; S Makhija
Journal:  Int J Gynecol Cancer       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.437

2.  Systems analysis of real-world obstacles to successful cervical cancer prevention in developing countries.

Authors:  Eric J Suba; Sean K Murphy; Amber D Donnelly; Lisa M Furia; My Linh D Huynh; Stephen S Raab
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-01-31       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Outcomes Up to 12 Months After Treatment With Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure for Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Among HIV-Infected Women.

Authors:  Megan J Huchko; Hannah Leslie; May Maloba; Jennifer Zakaras; Elizabeth Bukusi; Craig R Cohen
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.731

4.  An Insight Into Cervical Cancer Screening and Treatment Capacity in Sub Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Jenell S Coleman; Michelle S Cespedes; Susan Cu-Uvin; Rose J Kosgei; May Maloba; Jean Anderson; Timothy Wilkin; Antoine Jaquet; Julia Bohlius; Kathryn Anastos; Kara Wools-Kaloustian
Journal:  J Low Genit Tract Dis       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 1.925

5.  A randomized trial comparing the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol's Iodine for cervical cancer screening in HIV-infected women.

Authors:  Megan J Huchko; Jennifer Sneden; Jennifer M Zakaras; Karen Smith-McCune; George Sawaya; May Maloba; Elizabeth Ann Bukusi; Craig R Cohen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Biomarkers in cervical cancer.

Authors:  Eun-Kyoung Yim; Jong-Sup Park
Journal:  Biomark Insights       Date:  2007-02-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.