Journal of lower genital tract disease · 1998
Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: implications for management in a dysplasia clinic.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parai J L, Yazdi H M, Faught J W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The natural evolution of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS) within a dysplasia clinic population has not yet been studied. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of cervico-vaginal smears with the diagnosis of AGUS from dysplasia clinic patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cytopathological files of the Ottawa Civic Hospital were reviewed retrospectively from January 1993 to December 1995. In 59 dysplasia clinic patients, AGUS was diagnosed on one or more cervico-vaginal smears. Histological follow-up was available from 34 patients. Cytological follow-up was available on an additional 17 patients.
RESULTS: Nineteen patients had clinically significant lesions. In eight patients, squamous intraepithelial neoplasia was diagnosed; in five, adenocarcinoma in situ; in another five, adenocarcinoma; and, in one patient, endometrial hyperplasia with atypia. In 15 patients, follow-up was negative.
CONCLUSION: In a dysplasia clinic population in whom there was a cytological diagnosis of AGUS, we found 32% had significant pathology. Of these patients, 53% had glandular pathology. Based on our experience, histological assessment of the endocervix is suggested in these patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The cytopathological files of the Ottawa Civic Hospital were reviewed retrospectively from January 1993 to December 1995. In 59 dysplasia clinic patients, AGUS was diagnosed on one or more cervico-vaginal smears. Histological follow-up was available from 34 patients. Cytological follow-up was available on an additional 17 patients.
RESULTS: Nineteen patients had clinically significant lesions. In eight patients, squamous intraepithelial neoplasia was diagnosed; in five, adenocarcinoma in situ; in another five, adenocarcinoma; and, in one patient, endometrial hyperplasia with atypia. In 15 patients, follow-up was negative.
CONCLUSION: In a dysplasia clinic population in whom there was a cytological diagnosis of AGUS, we found 32% had significant pathology. Of these patients, 53% had glandular pathology. Based on our experience, histological assessment of the endocervix is suggested in these patients.