Ginecologia y obstetricia de Mexico · 2007
[Cervical biopsy: is the histological diagnosis reliable and reproducible? Utility of p16 INK4A in its achievement].
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Curiel Valdés José de J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cervical biopsy is the gold standard method used for diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, however, it has being stated a very low diagnostic agreement. Klaes demonstrates that p16 immunohistochemical marker increases from 40 to 97% the diagnostic agreement in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; due to it, its reliability, sensitivity and specificity to detect any neoplasia variant is 100%.
OBJECTIVE: To know the diagnostic agreement between Mexican pathologists during the study of two cervical intraepithelial neoplasia specimens stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and with p16, respectively.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two cervical biopsies, one stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and the other with p16, where shown to Mexican pathologists in order to express them diagnosis within the four neoplasia variants.
RESULTS: When using hematoxylin and eosin, 52.5% of fragment 1 cases has a CIN 1 diagnosis agreement, and 17.8% of fragment 2 has a CIN 2 diagnosis agreement. In both fragments, almost 100% of biopsies processed with p16 has an agreement.
CONCLUSION: It is clear that in daily practice the diagnostic criteria are in theory known but not correctly applied among pathologists; p16 is a useful, reliable and reproducible technique to establish the right diagnosis.
OBJECTIVE: To know the diagnostic agreement between Mexican pathologists during the study of two cervical intraepithelial neoplasia specimens stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and with p16, respectively.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two cervical biopsies, one stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and the other with p16, where shown to Mexican pathologists in order to express them diagnosis within the four neoplasia variants.
RESULTS: When using hematoxylin and eosin, 52.5% of fragment 1 cases has a CIN 1 diagnosis agreement, and 17.8% of fragment 2 has a CIN 2 diagnosis agreement. In both fragments, almost 100% of biopsies processed with p16 has an agreement.
CONCLUSION: It is clear that in daily practice the diagnostic criteria are in theory known but not correctly applied among pathologists; p16 is a useful, reliable and reproducible technique to establish the right diagnosis.