Literature DB >> 1989710

Improved endocervical sampling with the Cytobrush.

A Chalvardjian1, W G De Marchi, V Bell, R Nishikawa.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Ayre wooden spatula, the cotton-tipped swab and the Zelsmyr Cytobrush in obtaining endocervical cells.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional comparison study.
SETTING: Family practice unit. PATIENTS: All postpubertal, nonpregnant women who underwent a routine Papanicolaou smear during a 7-month period.
INTERVENTIONS: The three devices were used in each patient in a randomized sequence. An experienced cytotechnologist blinded to the device used evaluated the slides for overall epithelial cellularity (graded from 0 [acellular specimen] to 12 [overloaded sample]), density (the number of groups of five or more endocervical cells) and size of cell clusters (5 to 10 cells per cluster [score of 1], 11 to 100 [2] or more than 100 [3]). MAIN
RESULTS: Samples from 2 of the 136 women were rejected because of improper labelling of the slides or failure to use all three devices. Seventy-six (57%) of the smears obtained with the spatula and 71 (53%) with the swab had no endocervical cells, as compared with only 14 (10%) obtained with the Cytobrush (p = 0.001). The overall cellularity (and standard deviation [SD]) of the smears obtained with the Cytobrush (5.69 [SD 1.17], p = 0.001) and the spatula (5.70 [SD 1.46], p = 0.001) was significantly greater than the cellularity of those obtained with the swab (4.31 [SD 1.17]). The Cytobrush yielded significantly more groups of endocervical cells (109.84 per slide) than either the spatula (4.17) or the swab (6.25) (p = 0.001). The Cytobrush also produced larger cell clusters (1.56 [SD 0.67], p = 0.001) than either the swab (0.83 [SD 1.70]) or the spatula (0.64 [SD 0.67]).
CONCLUSIONS: The Cytobrush and the spatula should be used instead of the spatula alone or the spatula and the swab for collecting endocervical cells.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1989710      PMCID: PMC1452710     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  15 in total

1.  Histological topography of carcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri.

Authors:  L A PRZYBORA; A PLUTOWA
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1959 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Efficacy of the cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells.

Authors:  G B Kristensen; B Hølund; P Grinsted
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1989 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.319

3.  Proficiency testing in cytology laboratories in Ontario, Canada: a decade of experience. III. A precision study of consistency and reproducibility in cytology reporting.

Authors:  H Curry; D W Thompson; M Dietrich; M Lipa; G R Massarella; I R Taves; D E Wood; E Zuber
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1987 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.319

4.  Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears.

Authors:  P G Vooijs; A Elias; Y van der Graaf; S Veling
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1985 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.319

5.  Stage IB adenocarcinoma of the cervix treated by radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.

Authors:  B E Greer; D C Figge; H K Tamimi; J M Cain
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and Cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology. Improvements in smear quality and detection rates.

Authors:  M E Boon; J J Alons-van Kordelaar; P E Rietveld-Scheffers
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1986 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.319

7.  Endocervical brush cytology. An alternative to endocervical curettage?

Authors:  G A Weitzman; M O Korhonen; K O Reeves; J F Irwin; T S Carter; R H Kaufman
Journal:  J Reprod Med       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 0.142

8.  Reliability of cytological follow-up after conization of the cervix; a comparison of three surgical techniques.

Authors:  J B Trimbos; A P Heintz; E V van Hall
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1983-12

9.  Papanicolaou smears without endocervical cells. Are they inadequate?

Authors:  C Kivlahan; E Ingram
Journal:  Acta Cytol       Date:  1986 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.319

Review 10.  The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy.

Authors:  L G Koss
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-02-03       Impact factor: 56.272

View more
  4 in total

1.  Preoperative cervical cytology as a prognostic factor in endometrioid-type endometrial cancer: A single-center experience from Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Ahmed Abu-Zaid; Mohannad Alsabban; Osama Alomar; Mohammed Abuzaid; Mohammed Z Jamjoom; Hany Salem; Ismail A Al-Badawi
Journal:  Avicenna J Med       Date:  2020-07-03

2.  Comparative yield of endocervical and metaplastic cells. Two sampling techniques: wooden spatula and cytology brush.

Authors:  L Lo; J Jordan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Simultaneous profiling of sexually transmitted bacterial pathogens, microbiome, and concordant host response in cervical samples using whole transcriptome sequencing analysis.

Authors:  Catherine M O'Connell; Hayden Brochu; Jenna Girardi; Erin Harrell; Aiden Jones; Toni Darville; Arlene C Seña; Xinxia Peng
Journal:  Microb Cell       Date:  2019-01-24

4.  Geno- and seroprevalence of Felis domesticus Papillomavirus type 2 (FdPV2) in dermatologically healthy cats.

Authors:  Marco Geisseler; Christian E Lange; Claude Favrot; Nina Fischer; Mathias Ackermann; Kurt Tobler
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2016-07-22       Impact factor: 2.741

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.