Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-07.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
A Comparision of Surepath(TM) Liquid-Based Smear with a Conventional Smear for Cervicovaginal Cytology-with Reference to a Histological Diagnosis.
Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

J Pathol Transl Med : Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > J Pathol Transl Med > Volume 18(1); 2007 > Article
Original Article A Comparision of Surepath(TM) Liquid-Based Smear with a Conventional Smear for Cervicovaginal Cytology-with Reference to a Histological Diagnosis.
Kyung Chul Lee, Chan Kwon Jung, Ahwon Lee, Eun Sun Jung, Yeong Jin Choi, Jong Sup Park, Kyo Young Lee
Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 2007;18(1):20-28
DOI: https://doi.org/
1Department of Hospital Pathology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea. klee@catholic.ac.kr
2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
  • 2,104 Views
  • 39 Download
  • 0 Crossref
  • 0 Scopus

This study was performed to compare Surepath(TM) liquid-based smear and a conventional cervicovaginal smear with reference to a histological diagnosis. A hybrid capture test (HCII) was also performed and analyzed. We collected matched cases for cervicovaginal cytology- histology: 207 cases for conventional cytology (CC) and 199 cases for liquid-based cytology (LBC). HCII was performed in 254 patients. When a cytological diagnosis of ASCUS or above (ASCUS+) is classified as positive and a histological diagnosis of LSIL+ is classified as positive, the sensitivity and specificity for LBC was 91.7% and 75.9%, respectively and the sensitivity and specificity for CC was 62.6% and 96.1%, respectively. When a cytological and histological diagnosis of LSIL+ is classified as positive, the sensitivity and specificity for LBC was 77.5 and 96.6%, respectively and the sensitivity and specificity for CC was 49.7% and 100%, respectively. When a histological diagnosis of LSIL+ is classified as positive, the sensitivity and specificity for HCII was 78.9% and 78.1%, respectively. The concordance ratio between the cytological and histological diagnosis was 80.4% (kappa=76.0) for LBC and 56.5% (kappa=55.1) for CC. LBC is more sensitive and less specific then CC, as a cytological cutoff level of ASCUS, but more sensitive and equally specific, as a cytological cutoff level LSIL or HSIL. LBC is more reliable with a high concordance ratio between the cytological and histological diagnosis.

Related articles

J Pathol Transl Med : Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine