Introduction: Cervical cancer screening is an important tool in public health. Liquid-based cytology (LBC) has been performed at the studied hospital for 7 years. The present study compares the performance of 2 LBC techniques with conventional cytology. Objective: Our objective is to verify the sensitivity for the detection of neoplastic and preneoplastic epithelial atypia, as well as the positive predictive value of the 3 methodologies. Methods: We analyzed retrospectively 24,529 cases and evaluated the conventional cytology, ThinPrep®, and BD SurePath® performance categorizing the results according to the Bethesda system. We also compared the level of unsatisfactory samples, the presence of elements from the squamocolumnar junction, and the detection of pathogenic microorganisms. Results: ThinPrep® (1.43%) showed superior sensitivity over BD SurePath® (0.91%) and conventional cytology (0.71%) in terms of the detection of high-grade lesions; however, in terms of squamous atypia as a whole (ASC-US+), BD SurePath® (6.44%) proved to be more sensitive than conventional cytology (5.28%) and ThinPrep® (3.73%). Conclusions: The results show the advantage of implementing LBC in routine screening for cervical lesions. In this study, BD SurePath® achieved the overall best performance considering the studied variables.

Keywords:
Cervical cancer screening, Liquid-based cytology, Conventional cytology
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel
2020
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.