Objectives: To validate the modification of the prolonged Papanicolaou stain based on the quality control of time, units and staining stages (micro- and macroscopic), and on the stain reactivation based on the control. Study Design: A prospective study was performed on 125,358 cervical smears in Lima (Peru). The microscopic quality control included evaluating the cytological characteristics through the staining quality index (SQI) and the quality criteria for samples described by the Bethesda System (TBS). The macroscopic quality control is based on the interslide staining as a set corresponding to a poststaining vertical angle. The stains were reactivated with the addition of 0.15 and 2 g of phosphotungstic acid for Orange G and EA-50, respectively. Results: Both the nonneoplastic and the neoplastic findings comply with the quality criteria of the TBS (SQI value = 0.94). The yield per battery of staining fluctuated between 5,616 and 17,954 Pap smears, and the reactivation of stains produced a stain yield of up to four times the initial amount of the smears, saving USD 5,598.88 from 2013 to 2014. Conclusion: The modification of prolonged Papanicolaou staining is an excellent alternative, with a cost-benefit ratio that generates savings and a higher yield per battery of staining.

Keywords:
Cervical cancer screening, Cervical cytology, Papanicolaou smear, Papanicolaou test, Quality control
1.
Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM: Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008. GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Carcer 2010;127:2893-2917.
2.
Bruni L, Barrionuevo-Rosas L, Albero G, Aldea M, Serrano B, Valencia S, Brotons M, Mena M, Cosano R, Muñoz J, Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S, Castellsagué X: ICO Information Centre on HPV and Cancer (HPV Information Centre). Human Papillomavirus and Related Diseases in Peru. Summary Report 2015-03-20 (accessed May 15, 2015).
3.
Moya SJ, Pio DL: Prevalence of cervical-uterine abnormalities associated with poverty levels at ‘Hospital Nacional Docente Madre Niño San Bartolome' between 2011-2013 (in Spanish). Rev Invest Univ Norbert Wiener 2014;3:89-99.
4.
Rock J: Historical development of the pelvis surgery; in Thompson JD, Rock JA (eds): Te Linde's Operative Gynecology. Philadelphia, Lippincott, 1992, pp 1-12.
5.
Pravin SH, Ajita P: Application of modified ultrafast Papanicolaou stain in cytology of various organs. Diagn Cytopathol 2006;34:135-139.
6.
Takahashi M: Color Atlas of Cancer Cytology, ed 3. Alphen aan den Rijin, Kluwer, 2000.
7.
Arbyn M, Buntinx F, Van Ranst M, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsch P, Dillner J: Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal Pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:280-293.
8.
Salas DI, Prado R, Muñoz R: Manual de procedimientos del laboratorio de citología. Washington, OMS/OPS, 2012, p 82.
9.
Gill GW, Frost JK, Miller KA: A new formula for a half-oxidized hematoxylin solution that neither overstains nor requires differentiation. Acta Cytol 1974;18:300-311.
10.
Sunanda KM, Srinivas K: Randomised comparison of three Pap smear collection methods. J Evid Based Med Healthc 2014;1:997-1003.
11.
Dighe SB, Ajit D, Pathuthara S, Chinoy R: Papanicolaou stain: is it economical to switch to rapid, economical, acetic acid, Papanicolaou stain? Acta Cytol 2006;50:643-646.
12.
Walter J, Klein C, Wehrend A: Comparison of eosin-thiazin and Papanicolaou-Shorr staining for endometrial cytologies of broodmares. Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere 2011;39:358-362.
13.
Szczepanik EV: Deelandertagung Furklin. Zytologie ZiWiss Salzburg 1977;13:99-102.
14.
Acuña CR, Falla PA, Romaní RM: Evaluación de la técnica de tinción rápida Cytocolor versus la tinción Papanicolaou en citología cérvico-vaginal; tesis, Universidad Nacional Federico Villareal, Lima, 2006.
15.
Moyer VA; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:880-891.
16.
Moya-Salazar J, Rojas-Zumaran V, Torres-Martínez R, Rosas-Vargas L: Calidad de los extendidos cervicouterinos dentro de la coloración de Papanicolaou para el cribado de cáncer cervical en Lima, Perú (abstract in English). Rev Esp Patol 2016;49:7-18.
17.
Culling CFA: Handbook of Histopathological and Histochemical Techniques, ed 3. London, Butterworth, 1974, pp 489-490.
18.
Nayar R, Wilbur DC: The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. Definitions, Criteria, and Explanatory Notes, ed 3. Cham, Springer, 2015.
19.
Davey DD, Austin RM, Birdsong G, Buck HW, Cox JT, Darragh TM, Elgert PA, Hanson V, Henry MR, Waldman J; American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology: ASCCP patient management guidelines: Pap test specimen adequacy and quality indicators. Am J Clin Pathol 2002;118:714-718.
20.
Papanicolaou G, Traut H: The diagnostic value of vaginal smear in carcinoma of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1941;42:16.
21.
Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, Wiener H, Herbert A, von Karsa L: European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. Second edition - summary document. Ann Oncol 2010;21:448-458.
22.
Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988; Final Rule. Fed Regist 1992;57:493.
23.
Sica A, Alonso R, Rodríguez G: Manual de Procedimientos de los Laboratorios de Citología-Ginecológica. Programa de Prevención del Cáncer de Cuello Uterino ‘Enrique Pouey'. Montevideo, Comisión Honoraria de Lucha Contra el Cáncer, 2013.
24.
Wiener HG, Klinkhamer P, Schenck U, Arbyn M, Bulten J, Bergeron C, Herbert A: European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for cytology laboratories. Cytopathology 2007;18:67-78.
25.
Instituto Nacional de Salud: Guía de calidad para la toma de muestra, procesamiento e interpretación en muestras de citología de cuello uterino. Bogota, INS, 2009.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
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.