Diagnostic cytopathology · 2021
Cervical cancer: Automation of Pap test screening.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Rezende Mariana T, Bianchi Andrea G C, Carneiro Cláudia M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer progresses slowly, increasing the chance of early detection of pre-neoplastic lesions via Pap exam test and subsequently preventing deaths. However, the exam presents both false-negatives and false-positives results. Therefore, automatic methods (AMs) of reading the Pap test have been used to improve the quality control of the exam. We performed a literature review to evaluate the feasibility of implementing AMs in laboratories.
METHODS: This work reviewed scientific publications regarding automated cytology from the last 15 years. The terms used were "Papanicolaou test" and "Automated cytology screening" in Portuguese, English, and Spanish, in the three scientific databases (SCIELO, PUBMED, MEDLINE).
RESULTS: Of the resulting 787 articles, 34 were selected for a complete review, including three AMs: ThinPrep Imaging System, FocalPoint GS Imaging System and CytoProcessor. In total, 1 317 148 cytopathological slides were evaluated automatically, with 1 308 028 (99.3%) liquid-based cytology slides and 9120 (0.7%) conventional cytology smears. The AM diagnostic performances were statistically equal to or better than those of the manual method. AM use increased the detection of cellular abnormalities and reduced false-negatives. The average sample rejection rate was ≤3.5%.
CONCLUSION: AMs are relevant in quality control during the analytical phase of cervical cancer screening. This technology eliminates slide-handling steps and reduces the sample space, allowing professionals to focus on diagnostic interpretation while maintaining high-level care, which can reduce false-negatives. Further studies with conventional cytology are needed. The use of AM is still not so widespread in cytopathology laboratories.
METHODS: This work reviewed scientific publications regarding automated cytology from the last 15 years. The terms used were "Papanicolaou test" and "Automated cytology screening" in Portuguese, English, and Spanish, in the three scientific databases (SCIELO, PUBMED, MEDLINE).
RESULTS: Of the resulting 787 articles, 34 were selected for a complete review, including three AMs: ThinPrep Imaging System, FocalPoint GS Imaging System and CytoProcessor. In total, 1 317 148 cytopathological slides were evaluated automatically, with 1 308 028 (99.3%) liquid-based cytology slides and 9120 (0.7%) conventional cytology smears. The AM diagnostic performances were statistically equal to or better than those of the manual method. AM use increased the detection of cellular abnormalities and reduced false-negatives. The average sample rejection rate was ≤3.5%.
CONCLUSION: AMs are relevant in quality control during the analytical phase of cervical cancer screening. This technology eliminates slide-handling steps and reduces the sample space, allowing professionals to focus on diagnostic interpretation while maintaining high-level care, which can reduce false-negatives. Further studies with conventional cytology are needed. The use of AM is still not so widespread in cytopathology laboratories.