Objective: It has been reported that the low level of consistency of diagnosis of atypical squamous cells cannot exclude high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (ASC-H) in uterine cervical cancer screening using the Bethesda System, indicating the necessity of a large-scale survey. We presented cases cytologically judged as ASC-H on our website and invited our members to give their opinions regarding the diagnosis by voting online. The Web voting results were analyzed and ASC-H was cytologically investigated. Study Design: Virtual slides of atypical cells in cytology preparations of 53 cases were prepared and presented on a website. ASC-H cases were divided into 42 cases sampled by brush scraping and 11 cases sampled by cotton swab scraping. Fifty-three cases cytologically judged as ASC-H were classified into benign and CIN2/3, and their patterns of arrangement of atypical cells and 8 cytological parameters were morphologically investigated. Results: The frequency of ASC-H diagnosis in the Web votes was low: 29.2% for brush-scraped and 26.2% for cotton swab-scraped cases. Three-dimensionality, coarse chromatin and irregular nuclei were significantly different between high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and benign cases. Conclusion: Web-based surveys showed the difference of cytological findings between high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and benign cases. To increase interobserver consistency, it may be useful to share information online, which avoids geographical and temporal limitations.

Keywords:
Cervical cytodiagnosis, Bethesda System, Atypical squamous cells, High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, Web, Cytological analysis
1.
Solomon D, Nayar R (eds): The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, ed 2. New York, Springer, 2004.
2.
Solomon D, Nayar R (eds): The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. The Bethesda System, 2001 Atlas. Springer, Tokyo, 2007.
3.
Washiya K, Abe I, Ambo J, Iwai H, Okusawa E, Asanuma K, Watanabe J: Cytological analysis of atypical squamous epithelial cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) using the World Wide Web. Acta Cytol 2011;55:319–326.
4.
Sherman ME, Dasgupta A, Schiffman M, Nayar R, Solomon D: The Bethesda Interobserver Reproducibility Study (BIRST): a Web-based assessment of the Bethesda 2001 System for classifying cervical cytology. Cancer 2007;111:15–25.
5.
Shibata M, Arai Y, Furyta N, Tsuzuku M, Takizawa K, Fujiwara K, Utsugi K, Sugiyama Y, Takeshima N, Hirai Y: Clinical significance of atypical squamous cells (ASC; Bethesda System 2001) in uterine cervical cytology. J Jpn Soc Clin Cytol 2007;46:211–215.
6.
Rekhi B, Ajit D, Joseph SK, Gawas S, Deodhar KK: Evaluation of atypical squamous cells on conventional cytology smears: an experience from a screening program practiced in limited resource settings. Cytojournal 2010;5:7.
7.
Passamonti B, Gustinucci D, Recchia P, Bulletti S, Carlani A, Cesarini E, D’Amico MR, D’Angelo V, Di Dato E, Martinelli N, Malaspina M, Spita N: Expression of p16 in abnormal pap-tests as an indicator of CIN2+ lesions: a possible role in the low grade ASC/US and L/SIL (Ig) cytologic lesions for screening prevention of uterine cervical tumours. Pathologica 2010;102:6–11.
8.
Patton AL, Duncan L, Bloom L, Phaneuf G, Zafar N: Atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude a high-grade intraepithelial lesion and its clinical significance in postmenopausal, pregnant, postpartum, and contraceptive-use patients. Cancer 2008;114:481–488.
9.
Saad RS, Dabbs DJ, Kordunsky L, Kanbour-Shakir A, Silverman JF, Liu Y, Kanbour A: Clinical significance of cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high grade, in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;126:381–388.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.