Suppr超能文献

进展还是回归?——宫颈细胞学新慕尼黑命名法III的优缺点

Progression or Regression? - Strengths and Weaknesses of the New Munich Nomenclature III for Cervix Cytology.

作者信息

Hilal Z, Tempfer C, Schiermeier S, Reinecke J, Ruppenkamp C, Hilal Z

机构信息

ZYDOLAB - Institut für klinische Zytologie und Immunzytochemie, Dortmund.

Abteilung für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Ruhr Universität Bochum, Herne.

出版信息

Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2015 Oct;75(10):1051-1057. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1557904.

Abstract

Since 01. 01. 2015 the new Munich nomenclature III for gynaecological diagnostics of the cervix has been in force. The changes have led to controversial scientific discussions. This study reports for the first time on the consequences. The present data are based on smear screening results for the year 2014. The data of 63 134 patients were evaluated. 2.27 % of all smears were remarkable. Group IIa was assigned to 0.91 %. Group II-p was somewhat more frequently recorded than group IIID1 (0.59 vs. 0.53 %). Groups IIID1 and IIID2 were found in 0.53 and 0.61 %, respectively, of the cases. Agreement with histology was found in 36.84 and 44.68 %, respectively. Glandular lesions represented the most frequent changes in group III. Histological clarification was obtained for 0.18 % of all remarkable findings. The relative incidence of high-grade precancerous conditions (CIN III) and invasive tumours amounted to 0.1 %. A close communication between gynaecologists and cytologists is mandatory for the correct usage of the new nomenclature. The future annual statistics of the health insurances can now be analysed in more detail. A statistical classification of glandular epithelial changes is now also possible for the first time. The heterogeneous group IIa constitutes an unnecessary uncertainty for patients and physicians. The splitting of the group IIID does not appear to have any advantage for the further clinical management. Further studies are needed to show whether or not the classification can stand up to international comparisons.

摘要

自2015年1月1日起,新的慕尼黑宫颈妇科诊断命名法III开始生效。这些变化引发了有争议的科学讨论。本研究首次报告了其后果。目前的数据基于2014年的涂片筛查结果。对63134例患者的数据进行了评估。所有涂片中2.27%有异常。IIa组占0.91%。II-p组的记录频率略高于IIID1组(0.59%对0.53%)。IIID1组和IIID2组分别在0.53%和0.61%的病例中发现。与组织学的一致性分别为36.84%和44.68%。腺体病变是III组中最常见的变化。所有异常发现中0.18%进行了组织学明确诊断。高级别癌前病变(CIN III)和浸润性肿瘤的相对发生率为0.1%。为正确使用新命名法,妇科医生和细胞病理学家之间必须密切沟通。现在可以更详细地分析未来医疗保险的年度统计数据。首次对腺体上皮变化进行统计分类也成为可能。异质性的IIa组给患者和医生带来了不必要的不确定性。IIID组的细分似乎对进一步的临床管理没有任何优势。需要进一步研究以表明该分类是否经得起国际比较。

相似文献

1
Progression or Regression? - Strengths and Weaknesses of the New Munich Nomenclature III for Cervix Cytology.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2015 Oct;75(10):1051-1057. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1557904.
5
Method comparison between Munich II and III nomenclature for Pap smear samples.
J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2015 Nov 2;16(4):203-7. doi: 10.5152/jtgga.2015.0147. eCollection 2015.
8
Benefit and burden in the Dutch cytology-based vs high-risk human papillomavirus-based cervical cancer screening program.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Feb;224(2):200.e1-200.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.026. Epub 2020 Aug 13.
9
Cytology and High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Test for Cervical Cancer Screening Assessment.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jul 19;12(7):1748. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12071748.

本文引用的文献

4
Human papillomavirus genotype distribution in cytologically screened women from northwest Germany.
Acta Cytol. 2013;57(6):591-8. doi: 10.1159/000355099. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
5
Updating the natural history of human papillomavirus and anogenital cancers.
Vaccine. 2012 Nov 20;30 Suppl 5(0 5):F24-33. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.05.089.
6
New developments in endocervical glandular lesions.
Histopathology. 2013 Jan;62(1):138-60. doi: 10.1111/his.12012. Epub 2012 Nov 8.
7
[Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of cervical adenocarcinoma].
Pathologe. 2011 Nov;32(6):505-13. doi: 10.1007/s00292-011-1481-8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验