Cargando…

An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?

BACKGROUND: Cervical cytology screening for carcinoma of the cervix in India is mainly opportunistic in nature and is practiced mainly in urban centres. The effectiveness of cervical cytology screening depends on various factors. The quality of cervicovaginal cytology service is assessed by various...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Crasta, Julian A, Chaitra, V, Simi, CM, Correa, Marjorie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21938156
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-9371.55225
_version_ 1782211321183338496
author Crasta, Julian A
Chaitra, V
Simi, CM
Correa, Marjorie
author_facet Crasta, Julian A
Chaitra, V
Simi, CM
Correa, Marjorie
author_sort Crasta, Julian A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cervical cytology screening for carcinoma of the cervix in India is mainly opportunistic in nature and is practiced mainly in urban centres. The effectiveness of cervical cytology screening depends on various factors. The quality of cervicovaginal cytology service is assessed by various quality indices and by cyto-histology correlation, which is the most important quality assurance measure. AIMS: To describe the cervical cytology diagnoses, estimate the quality indices, and evaluate the discrepant cases on cytohistological correlation. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Retrospective observational study from a tertiary care centre in South India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a database search, all the cervicovaginal cytology reported during the period of 2002-2006 was retrieved and various diagnoses were described. The data was analysed to assess the quality indices. The cytohistologically discrepant cases were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 10,787 cases were retrieved, of which 98.14% were labeled negative and 1.36% were unsatisfactory for evaluation. A few (0.81%) of the cases were labeled as squamous intraepithelial lesions and 0.38% as atypical squamous cells. The ASCUS: SIL ratio was 0.5. Cytohistological correlation revealed a total of ten cases with significant discrepancy. The majority of these were carcinomas that were misdiagnosed as atypical glandular cells. These cytology smears and the subsequent biopsies were reviewed to elucidate the reasons for the discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: The cervical cytology service at our centre is well within the accepted standards. An increased awareness of cytological features, especially of glandular lesions, a good clinician-laboratory communication and a regular cytohistological review would further improve the diagnostic standards.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3168022
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31680222011-09-21 An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening? Crasta, Julian A Chaitra, V Simi, CM Correa, Marjorie J Cytol Original Article BACKGROUND: Cervical cytology screening for carcinoma of the cervix in India is mainly opportunistic in nature and is practiced mainly in urban centres. The effectiveness of cervical cytology screening depends on various factors. The quality of cervicovaginal cytology service is assessed by various quality indices and by cyto-histology correlation, which is the most important quality assurance measure. AIMS: To describe the cervical cytology diagnoses, estimate the quality indices, and evaluate the discrepant cases on cytohistological correlation. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Retrospective observational study from a tertiary care centre in South India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a database search, all the cervicovaginal cytology reported during the period of 2002-2006 was retrieved and various diagnoses were described. The data was analysed to assess the quality indices. The cytohistologically discrepant cases were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 10,787 cases were retrieved, of which 98.14% were labeled negative and 1.36% were unsatisfactory for evaluation. A few (0.81%) of the cases were labeled as squamous intraepithelial lesions and 0.38% as atypical squamous cells. The ASCUS: SIL ratio was 0.5. Cytohistological correlation revealed a total of ten cases with significant discrepancy. The majority of these were carcinomas that were misdiagnosed as atypical glandular cells. These cytology smears and the subsequent biopsies were reviewed to elucidate the reasons for the discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: The cervical cytology service at our centre is well within the accepted standards. An increased awareness of cytological features, especially of glandular lesions, a good clinician-laboratory communication and a regular cytohistological review would further improve the diagnostic standards. Medknow Publications Pvt Ltd 2009 /pmc/articles/PMC3168022/ /pubmed/21938156 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-9371.55225 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Cytology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Crasta, Julian A
Chaitra, V
Simi, CM
Correa, Marjorie
An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title_full An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title_fullStr An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title_full_unstemmed An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title_short An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: Are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
title_sort audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: are atypical glandular cells under-recognised on cytological screening?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21938156
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-9371.55225
work_keys_str_mv AT crastajuliana anauditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT chaitrav anauditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT simicm anauditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT correamarjorie anauditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT crastajuliana auditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT chaitrav auditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT simicm auditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening
AT correamarjorie auditofcervicovaginalcytologyinateachinghospitalareatypicalglandularcellsunderrecognisedoncytologicalscreening