P Vassilakos1, J Saurel, R Rondez. 1. Center for Cytology and Clinical Pathology, University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland. vassilakos@cytopath.int.ch
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the AutoCyte PREP direct-to-vial procedure to the conventional Pap smear in two large and similar patient groups compiled from the testing experience of three cytology laboratories in Switzerland and France. STUDY DESIGN: Randomly selected, large patient groups were evaluated using either the conventional Pap smear or the AutoCyte PREP direct-to-vial liquid-based preparation. Results were then compared statistically as to disease detection and sample adequacy. RESULTS: Specimen adequacy was greatly improved in the group tested with the AutoCyte PREP. PREP also demonstrated a significant reduction in ASCUS and ASCUS:LSIL+ ratios. The three laboratories participating in this review found significantly improved detection of both low and high grade SIL. Routine use of AutoCyte PREP for cervical cytology screening offers substantial improvements in adequacy and disease detection.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the AutoCyte PREP direct-to-vial procedure to the conventional Pap smear in two large and similar patient groups compiled from the testing experience of three cytology laboratories in Switzerland and France. STUDY DESIGN: Randomly selected, large patient groups were evaluated using either the conventional Pap smear or the AutoCyte PREP direct-to-vial liquid-based preparation. Results were then compared statistically as to disease detection and sample adequacy. RESULTS: Specimen adequacy was greatly improved in the group tested with the AutoCyte PREP. PREP also demonstrated a significant reduction in ASCUS and ASCUS:LSIL+ ratios. The three laboratories participating in this review found significantly improved detection of both low and high grade SIL. Routine use of AutoCyte PREP for cervical cytology screening offers substantial improvements in adequacy and disease detection.
Authors: C E Depuydt; A J Vereecken; G M Salembier; A S Vanbrabant; L A Boels; E van Herck; M Arbyn; K Segers; J J Bogers Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2003-02-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Christophe E Depuydt; Marc Arbyn; Ina H Benoy; Johan Vandepitte; Annie J Vereecken; Johannes J Bogers Journal: J Cell Mol Med Date: 2008-06-09 Impact factor: 5.310
Authors: Alex Vorsters; Tine Cornelissen; Elke Leuridan; Johannes Bogers; Davy Vanden Broeck; Ina Benoy; Herman Goossens; Niel Hens; Pierre Van Damme Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 3.295