Celik C, Gezginç K, Toy H, Findik S, Yilmaz O
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Selcuk University Meram Medical School, Konya, Turkey.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008 Feb;100(2):163-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.07.023. Epub 2007 Oct 24.
To evaluate the 2 methods of cytologic screening to detect abnormalities of the cervical epithelium.
This study with 3 groups of women was performed at Selcuk University Meram Medical School between January 2004 and March 2006. In one group (paired sample for specimen collection) women were screened with conventional cytology; in another group (paired sample for specimen collection) they were screened with liquid-based cytology; and in the third group (split sample for specimen collection) they were screened by both methods.
The rate of unsatisfactory results was lower in the liquid-based than in the conventional cytology group (6.1% vs. 2.6%; P<0.05). More smears containing atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance were detected by the liquid-based method, but the difference was not statistically significant. Also, no statistically significant differences between liquid-based and conventional cytology were observed in the detection of other epithelial abnormalities (P>0.05).
The liquid-based and conventional cytology methods were found to be equivalent in the detection of cervical epithelial abnormalities.
评估两种细胞学筛查方法检测宫颈上皮异常的情况。
2004年1月至2006年3月在塞尔丘克大学梅拉姆医学院对三组女性进行了本研究。一组(标本采集配对样本)女性采用传统细胞学进行筛查;另一组(标本采集配对样本)采用液基细胞学进行筛查;第三组(标本采集分割样本)采用两种方法进行筛查。
液基细胞学组不满意结果的发生率低于传统细胞学组(6.1%对2.6%;P<0.05)。液基方法检测出更多含有意义不明确的非典型鳞状细胞的涂片,但差异无统计学意义。此外,在检测其他上皮异常方面,液基细胞学和传统细胞学之间未观察到统计学上的显著差异(P>0.05)。
发现液基细胞学和传统细胞学方法在检测宫颈上皮异常方面等效。