OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the BD SurePath™ liquid-based Papanicolaou test for assessing the cytology of intrauterine endometrial samples according to newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and a novel descriptive reporting format. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two endometrial samples were analyzed. All samples were obtained directly from the intrauterine cavity using the Uterobrush or Honest Super Brush. The samples used for the histological examination and cytological tests were collected simultaneously. Our study group devised new cytological diagnostic criteria for examining endometrial samples: the Osaki Study Group method. In this study, histological diagnosis was considered to be the gold standard for cytological diagnosis. A novel descriptive reporting format was also used. RESULTS: Satisfactory cytological specimens were obtained in all cases. The sensitivity and specificity of the SurePath endometrial cytological examination method were 96.4 and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the SurePath method is acceptable for clinical use. Since the SurePath method seems to be easier and allows greater preparation standardization than the conventional method, coupling it with our newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and descriptive reporting format might represent a reliable diagnostic method for assessing endometrial specimens.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the BD SurePath™ liquid-based Papanicolaou test for assessing the cytology of intrauterine endometrial samples according to newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and a novel descriptive reporting format. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two endometrial samples were analyzed. All samples were obtained directly from the intrauterine cavity using the Uterobrush or Honest Super Brush. The samples used for the histological examination and cytological tests were collected simultaneously. Our study group devised new cytological diagnostic criteria for examining endometrial samples: the Osaki Study Group method. In this study, histological diagnosis was considered to be the gold standard for cytological diagnosis. A novel descriptive reporting format was also used. RESULTS: Satisfactory cytological specimens were obtained in all cases. The sensitivity and specificity of the SurePath endometrial cytological examination method were 96.4 and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that the SurePath method is acceptable for clinical use. Since the SurePath method seems to be easier and allows greater preparation standardization than the conventional method, coupling it with our newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and descriptive reporting format might represent a reliable diagnostic method for assessing endometrial specimens.