Pérez-Cruz Eduardo, Winkler Jennifer L, Velasco-Mondragón Eduardo, Salmerón-Castro Jorge, García Francisco, Davis-Tsu Vivien, Escandón-Romero Celia, Hernández-Avila Mauricio
Programa IMSS-Oportunidades, México, DF, México.
Salud Publica Mex. 2005 Jan-Feb;47(1):39-48. doi: 10.1590/s0036-36342005000100007.
To compare the standard cervical cancer screening procedure--the Papanicolaou test or Pap smear--with detection through visual inspection using acetic acid (VIA), and visual inspection with acetic acid assisted by Aviscope (VIAM).
The study was conducted between October 1998 and December 2000, in two Mixteca regions in Oaxaca, Mexico. A field trial design was used to randomize the two regions to either of the two inspection methods. In one region 2,240 women received VIA; in the other, 2,542 women received VIAM. Women positive to visual inspection and a subsample of women with negative results were referred for colposcopy and, if necessary, cervical biopsy. Statistical data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and comparison of groups using chi-squared tests. Diagnostic values were obtained for VIA and VIAM, using as gold standards colposcopy and biopsy.
VIAM identified a higher proportion of women with a cervical abnormality (16.3%) than VIA (3.4%), as well as normal women (58.5% vs. 53.8%).VIA identified a higher proportion of women with benign changes (41.2%) than VIAM (19.6%).VIAM had a greater sensitivity (p>0.05) but lower specificity (p<0.05) than VIA, using as gold standards colposcopy and biopsy.
The two study groups were comparable for age, parity and cytological results; however, visual inspection results were different between the groups: VIAM identified more lesions confirmed by biopsy. The diagnostic utility of VIAM and VIA was lower than expected. Training of clinical personnel in visual inspection is critical to improve the effectiveness of these screening methods.
比较标准宫颈癌筛查程序——巴氏试验(即宫颈涂片检查)与醋酸肉眼观察法(VIA)以及醋酸肉眼观察辅助阴道镜检查法(VIAM)的检测效果。
研究于1998年10月至2000年12月在墨西哥瓦哈卡州的两个米斯特克地区进行。采用现场试验设计将两个地区随机分为两种检查方法中的一种。在一个地区,2240名妇女接受了VIA检查;在另一个地区,2542名妇女接受了VIAM检查。对肉眼观察呈阳性的妇女以及部分肉眼观察结果为阴性的妇女进行了阴道镜检查,并在必要时进行宫颈活检。统计数据分析包括描述性统计以及使用卡方检验进行组间比较。以阴道镜检查和活检作为金标准,得出VIA和VIAM的诊断价值。
与VIA(3.4%)相比,VIAM识别出宫颈异常的妇女比例更高(16.3%),识别出正常妇女的比例也更高(分别为58.5%和53.8%)。VIA识别出良性病变的妇女比例高于VIAM(分别为41.2%和19.6%)。以阴道镜检查和活检作为金标准,VIAM的敏感性更高(p>0.05),但特异性低于VIA(p<0.05)。
两个研究组在年龄、产次和细胞学结果方面具有可比性;然而,两组的肉眼观察结果有所不同:VIAM识别出更多经活检证实的病变。VIAM和VIA的诊断效用低于预期。对临床人员进行肉眼观察培训对于提高这些筛查方法的有效性至关重要。