Cervical cancer is a major worldwide health problem. Therefore, regular cervical screening in order to make an early diagnosis can help to prevent cervical cancer, through identifying and treating preinvasive cervical lesions. The aim of this review is to evaluate the correlation between the cytological screening result and the final gold standard histological outcome in the diagnosis of cervical lesions. More specifically, the correlation between high-grade intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) on cytology and histological cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) was intended, by calculating the positive predictive value (PPV). PPV is an important value from a clinical point of view. An electronic search was carried out in the electronic databases MEDLINE (through PubMed) and the Cochrane Library (last searched beginning of December 2017), supplemented with the related article feature in PubMed and snowballing. Article selection (predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria) and data extraction were evaluated by two independent reviewers (N.K. and A.V.L.). After identifying 1,146 articles, 27 articles were finally included in this systematic review, representing 28,783 cytological HSIL diagnoses in total. The PPV of HSIL was 77.5% (range: 45.4–95.2%) for the histological diagnosis of CIN2+ and 55.4% (range: 36.4–67.6%) for the diagnosis of CIN3+. In this systematic review, 77.5% of the HSIL-positive women eventually had a CIN2+ diagnosis. The diagnostic value of a cytological HSIL result (conventional or liquid-based cytology) in the diagnosis of CIN2+ lesions is good, but a combination of tests could raise this value.

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.