J A Henry1, V Wadehra. 1. Department of Clinical Cytology, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation between cervical smear quality and the rate of detecting significant epithelial abnormalities. STUDY DESIGN: Smear quality was assessed routinely in a series of 68,328 cervical spatula and spatula/brush combination smears received by our laboratory during 1993. Quality was assessed using a semiquantitative method, evaluating the presence of endocervical cells, metaplastic squamous cells, endocervical mucus and overall squamous cellularity. RESULTS: Smear quality was graded as unsatisfactory, poor (18,680 smears), fair (9,739 smears) or good (39,909 smears); unsatisfactory smears were eliminated from the analysis. There was a highly significant correlation between smear quality and the rate of detecting significant epithelial abnormalities (chi 2=127.52, df=2, P<.001). CONCLUSION: Smear quality is an important issue. Many significant abnormalities are potentially missed because of poor smear quality.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the correlation between cervical smear quality and the rate of detecting significant epithelial abnormalities. STUDY DESIGN: Smear quality was assessed routinely in a series of 68,328 cervical spatula and spatula/brush combination smears received by our laboratory during 1993. Quality was assessed using a semiquantitative method, evaluating the presence of endocervical cells, metaplastic squamous cells, endocervical mucus and overall squamous cellularity. RESULTS: Smear quality was graded as unsatisfactory, poor (18,680 smears), fair (9,739 smears) or good (39,909 smears); unsatisfactory smears were eliminated from the analysis. There was a highly significant correlation between smear quality and the rate of detecting significant epithelial abnormalities (chi 2=127.52, df=2, P<.001). CONCLUSION: Smear quality is an important issue. Many significant abnormalities are potentially missed because of poor smear quality.
Authors: Christopher L Owens; Dan Peterson; Aruna Kamineni; Diana S M Buist; Sheila Weinmann; Tyler R Ross; Andrew E Williams; Azadeh Stark; Kenneth F Adams; Terry S Field Journal: Cancer Cytopathol Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Christopher L Owens; Diana S M Buist; Daniel Peterson; Aruna Kamineni; Sheila Weinmann; Tyler Ross; Andrew E Williams; Azadeh Stark; Kenneth F Adams; Chyke A Doubeni; Terry S Field Journal: Cancer Cytopathol Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Y L Hock; S Ramaiah; E S Wall; A M Harris; L Marston; J Marshall; K Kendall; A Teale Journal: J Clin Pathol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 3.411