Korean J Cytopathol.  2007 Mar;18(1):20-28.

A Comparision of Surepath(TM) Liquid-Based Smear with a Conventional Smear for Cervicovaginal Cytology-with Reference to a Histological Diagnosis

Affiliations
  • 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.

Abstract

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.

Keyword

Cervicovaginal smear; Liquid-based cytology; Surepath(TM); Hybrid Capture II test
Full Text Links
  • KJC
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2021 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr