OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) versus conventional Pap smear as a screening tool for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia/cancer among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 150 HIV-infected women attending the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital HIV clinic in Eldoret underwent conventional Pap smear, VIA, colposcopy, and biopsy. Both VIA and Pap smears were done by nurses, whereas colposcopy and biopsy were done by a physician. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was conducted to compare the accuracies between VIA and Pap smear in sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). RESULTS: Among the study participants: VIA was abnormal in 55.3% (83/150, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.0%-63.5%); Pap smear showed atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse in 43.7% (59/135, 95% CI = 35.2%-52.5%) and 10% (15/150) of the Pap smears were unsatisfactory. Of the abnormal Pap smears, 3% (2/59) had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, 7% (4/59) had high-grade atypical squamous cells, 60% (35/59) had low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, 29% (17/59) had high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, and 2% (1/59) was suspicious for cervical cancer. Using cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or higher disease on biopsy as an end point, VIA has a sensitivity of 69.6% (95% CI = 55.1%-81.0%), specificity of 51.0% (95% CI = 41.5%-60.4%), PPV of 38.6% (95% CI = 28.8%-49.3%), and NPV of 79.1% (95% CI = 67.8%-87.2%). For conventional Pap smear, sensitivity was 52.5% (95% CI = 42.1%-71.5%), specificity was 66.3% (95% CI = 52.0%-71.2%), PPV was 39.7% (95% CI = 27.6%-51.8%), and NPV was 76.8% (95% CI = 67.0%-85.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Visual inspection with acetic acid is comparable to Pap smear and acceptable for screening HIV-infected women in resource-limited settings such as Western Kenya.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) versus conventional Pap smear as a screening tool for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia/cancer among humanimmunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infectedwomen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 150 HIV-infectedwomen attending the Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital HIV clinic in Eldoret underwent conventional Pap smear, VIA, colposcopy, and biopsy. Both VIA and Pap smears were done by nurses, whereas colposcopy and biopsy were done by a physician. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was conducted to compare the accuracies between VIA and Pap smear in sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). RESULTS: Among the study participants: VIA was abnormal in 55.3% (83/150, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.0%-63.5%); Pap smear showed atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse in 43.7% (59/135, 95% CI = 35.2%-52.5%) and 10% (15/150) of the Pap smears were unsatisfactory. Of the abnormal Pap smears, 3% (2/59) had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance, 7% (4/59) had high-grade atypical squamous cells, 60% (35/59) had low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, 29% (17/59) had high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, and 2% (1/59) was suspicious for cervical cancer. Using cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or higher disease on biopsy as an end point, VIA has a sensitivity of 69.6% (95% CI = 55.1%-81.0%), specificity of 51.0% (95% CI = 41.5%-60.4%), PPV of 38.6% (95% CI = 28.8%-49.3%), and NPV of 79.1% (95% CI = 67.8%-87.2%). For conventional Pap smear, sensitivity was 52.5% (95% CI = 42.1%-71.5%), specificity was 66.3% (95% CI = 52.0%-71.2%), PPV was 39.7% (95% CI = 27.6%-51.8%), and NPV was 76.8% (95% CI = 67.0%-85.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Visual inspection with acetic acid is comparable to Pap smear and acceptable for screening HIV-infectedwomen in resource-limited settings such as Western Kenya.
Authors: Stephen E Hawes; Cathy W Critchlow; Papa Salif Sow; Papa Touré; Ibraham N'Doye; Aissatou Diop; Jane M Kuypers; Abdoul A Kasse; Nancy B Kiviat Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-01-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Kevin P McKenzie; Robyn K Rogers; Julia W Njoroge; Grace John-Stewart; Barbra A Richardson; Nelly R Mugo; Hugo De Vuyst; Ritesh N Pamnani; Farzana S Rana; Danson Warui; Michael H Chung Journal: Curr HIV Res Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 1.581
Authors: A L Akinwuntan; O A Adesina; C A Okolo; O A Oluwasola; A Oladokun; A A Ifemeje; I F Adewole Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: Pragna Patel; Charles E Rose; Pamela Y Collins; Bernardo Nuche-Berenguer; Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Emmanuel Peprah; Susan Vorkoper; Sonak D Pastakia; Dianne Rausch; Naomi S Levitt Journal: AIDS Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Deepa Reddy; Joseph Njala; Penny Stocker; Alan Schooley; Martiniano Flores; Chi-Hong Tseng; Colin Pfaff; Perry Jansen; Ronald T Mitsuyasu; Risa M Hoffman Journal: Int J STD AIDS Date: 2014-06-13 Impact factor: 1.359
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
Authors: Megan J Huchko; Jennifer Sneden; George Sawaya; Karen Smith-McCune; May Maloba; Naila Abdulrahim; Elizabeth A Bukusi; Craig R Cohen Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Allen C Bateman; Groesbeck P Parham; Vikrant V Sahasrabuddhe; Mulindi H Mwanahamuntu; Sharon Kapambwe; Katundu Katundu; Theresa Nkole; Jacqueline Mulundika; Krista S Pfaendler; Michael L Hicks; Aaron Shibemba; Sten H Vermund; Jeffrey S A Stringer; Carla J Chibwesha Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Michael H Chung; Kevin P McKenzie; Hugo De Vuyst; Barbra A Richardson; Farzana Rana; Ritesh Pamnani; Julia W Njoroge; Evans Nyongesa-Malava; Samah R Sakr; Grace C John-Stewart; Nelly R Mugo Journal: AIDS Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 4.177