Acta cytologica · 1997
Cervicography. Does it improve cervical cancer screening?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Baldauf J J, Dreyfus M, Ritter J, Meyer P, Philippe E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the reliability of cytology with that of cervicography and with the use of both tests when screening for neoplasia of the cervix and to analyze the causes of false positive and false negative results with both methods.
STUDY DESIGN: The results of cytology and cervicography in 1,709 patients (1,447 seen for routine screening, 82 for follow-up after treatment for cervical neoplasia and 180 referred because of cytologic anomalies) were correlated with colpohistologic findings.
RESULTS: Cervicography entailed more defective examinations than did cytology (8.9% vs. 0.2%, P < .0001). It was less sensitive (51% vs. 59%, P = .320) and less specific (96% vs. 98%, P = .004). Whatever the clinical criteria (patient's age, parity, pregnancy or history of cervical treatment), the rate of false positives with cervicography was always higher than with cytology, as was the rate of false negatives, except in pregnant women.
CONCLUSION: Cervicography does not seem to offer a worthwhile alternative to cytology for cervical screening.
STUDY DESIGN: The results of cytology and cervicography in 1,709 patients (1,447 seen for routine screening, 82 for follow-up after treatment for cervical neoplasia and 180 referred because of cytologic anomalies) were correlated with colpohistologic findings.
RESULTS: Cervicography entailed more defective examinations than did cytology (8.9% vs. 0.2%, P < .0001). It was less sensitive (51% vs. 59%, P = .320) and less specific (96% vs. 98%, P = .004). Whatever the clinical criteria (patient's age, parity, pregnancy or history of cervical treatment), the rate of false positives with cervicography was always higher than with cytology, as was the rate of false negatives, except in pregnant women.
CONCLUSION: Cervicography does not seem to offer a worthwhile alternative to cytology for cervical screening.