Liverani M, De Paola F, Danesi S, Fedriga R, Dalbuoni V, Agnoletti R, Amadori A R, Mirra F, Bonoli W, Saragoni L
U.O. Anatomia Patologica, Ospedale Morgagni-Pierantoni, Forlì, Italia.
Pathologica. 2006 Dec;98(6):629-34.
The quality of cytological services is the very heart of the prevention of cervical pathologies. Indeed, various studies have demonstrated that inadequate sampling, mistakes made in the organisational and management methods of the screening programme, and incorrect diagnoses result in unnecessarily high incidence and mortality rates. The aim of this work is to compare the effectiveness of two different methods, i.e. a conventional smear test and a liquid based ThinPrep (TP) test. Said methods were tested on a sample 453 cases diagnosed as being "Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance"/"Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance" according to the 1991 Bethesda System. All the women with an "Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance "/"Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance" cytological diagnosis were called back within 3 months for a ThinPrep test, as part of the Level 2 diagnostic controls of a cervical cancer screening programme. Of the initial diagnoses of "Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance"/"Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance" with a conventional smear test, 124 cases (27.4%) were classified as being adequate, while 329 (72.6%) were satisfactory, although they did have limited indicators of quality. Upon repetition of the cytology with a ThinPrep test, 322 cases (71.1%) were found to be adequate, 129 (28.4%) "suboptimal" and 2 inadequate (p < 0.0001). The main reasons for insufficient results in conventional smear tests are: bad preservation (40.2%), the presence of granulocytes (36.4%), intense phlogosis (12.1%) and erythrocytes (5.5%). In liquid based smear tests, the main indicator of quality is the absence of endocervical glandular cells (56.7%). As for the cytological diagnosis, the use of ThinPrep supplied the following results: of the 453 cases diagnosed initially as being "Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance"/"Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance", 371 (84.1%) were negative, 54 (11.9%) "Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance "/"Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance" and 18 (4%) L-SIL (p < 0.0001). Histological follow-up of the 18 cases with L-SIL confirmed the presence of a dysplastic lesion in 8 out of 12 cases (66.7%); in 4 cases there was no consistency between the cytological and histological diagnoses, and in 6 patients no biopsy had been taken. The preliminary experience of this study, although indeed carried out on a limited number of cases, appears to show that suitable training for the collection of samples in a liquid solution could improve the adequacy of the sample and thus the precision of the cytological diagnosis.
细胞学检查服务的质量是预防宫颈病变的核心所在。事实上,多项研究表明,采样不足、筛查项目组织管理方法上的失误以及诊断错误会导致不必要的高发病率和死亡率。本研究的目的是比较两种不同方法的有效性,即传统涂片检查和液基薄层制片(TP)检查。上述方法在453例根据1991年贝塞斯达系统诊断为“意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞”/“意义不明确的非典型腺细胞”的病例样本上进行了测试。所有细胞学诊断为“意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞”/“意义不明确的非典型腺细胞”的女性在3个月内被召回进行薄层制片检查,作为宫颈癌筛查项目二级诊断控制的一部分。在最初采用传统涂片检查诊断为“意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞”/“意义不明确的非典型腺细胞”的病例中,124例(27.4%)被归类为合格,329例(72.6%)虽质量指标有限但仍为满意。在采用薄层制片检查重复进行细胞学检查时,发现322例(71.1%)合格,129例(28.4%)“次优”,2例不合格(p<0.0001)。传统涂片检查结果不足的主要原因是:保存不佳(40.2%)、存在粒细胞(36.4%)、炎症剧烈(12.1%)和红细胞(5.5%)。在液基涂片检查中,质量的主要指标是宫颈管腺细胞缺失(56.7%)。至于细胞学诊断,采用薄层制片检查得出以下结果:在最初诊断为“意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞”/“意义不明确的非典型腺细胞”的453例病例中,371例(84.1%)为阴性,54例(11.9%)为“意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞”/“意义不明确的非典型腺细胞”,18例(4%)为低度鳞状上皮内病变(p<0.0001)。对18例低度鳞状上皮内病变病例的组织学随访证实,12例中有8例(66.7%)存在发育异常病变;4例细胞学和组织学诊断不一致,6例患者未进行活检。本研究的初步经验虽然确实是在有限数量的病例上进行的,但似乎表明针对在液体溶液中采集样本进行适当培训可以提高样本的充分性,从而提高细胞学诊断的准确性。