OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the current conventional Pap smear with liquid-based cytology (LBC) preparations. STUDY DESIGN: Women routinely undergoing their cytopathological and histopathological examinations at Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo (FOSP) were recruited for LBC. Conventional smears were analyzed from women from other areas of the State of São Paulo with similar sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 218,594 cases were analyzed, consisting of 206,999 conventional smears and 11,595 LBC. Among the conventional smears, 3.0% were of unsatisfactory preparation; conversely, unsatisfactory LBC preparations accounted for 0.3%. The ASC-H (atypical squamous cells - cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) frequency did not demonstrate any differences between the two methods. In contrast, the incidence of ASC-US (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) was almost twice as frequent between LBC and conventional smears, at 2.9 versus 1.6%, respectively. An equal percentage of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were observed for the two methods, but not for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, which were more significantly observed in LBC preparations than in conventional smears (2.2 vs. 0.7%). The index of positivity was importantly enhanced from 3.0% (conventional smears) to 5.7% (LBC). CONCLUSIONS: LBC performed better than conventional smears, and we are truly confident that LBC can improve public health strategies aimed at reducing cervical lesions through prevention programs.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the current conventional Pap smear with liquid-based cytology (LBC) preparations. STUDY DESIGN:Women routinely undergoing their cytopathological and histopathological examinations at Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo (FOSP) were recruited for LBC. Conventional smears were analyzed from women from other areas of the State of São Paulo with similar sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 218,594 cases were analyzed, consisting of 206,999 conventional smears and 11,595 LBC. Among the conventional smears, 3.0% were of unsatisfactory preparation; conversely, unsatisfactory LBC preparations accounted for 0.3%. The ASC-H (atypical squamous cells - cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) frequency did not demonstrate any differences between the two methods. In contrast, the incidence of ASC-US (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) was almost twice as frequent between LBC and conventional smears, at 2.9 versus 1.6%, respectively. An equal percentage of high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were observed for the two methods, but not for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, which were more significantly observed in LBC preparations than in conventional smears (2.2 vs. 0.7%). The index of positivity was importantly enhanced from 3.0% (conventional smears) to 5.7% (LBC). CONCLUSIONS: LBC performed better than conventional smears, and we are truly confident that LBC can improve public health strategies aimed at reducing cervical lesions through prevention programs.