Cargando…

Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of two cervical collection devices (Cytobrush+Ayres spatula and Cervex-Brush(®) Combi) for cellular sampling, transformation zone representation and accuracy in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+. METHODS: Cervical samples were collected fro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Simonsen, Marcelo, Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani, José Humberto, Possati Resende, Júlio Cesar, Antoniazzi, Márcio, Longatto-Filho, Adhemar, Scapulatempo-Neto, Cristovam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5065172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27741238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164077
_version_ 1782460282015055872
author Simonsen, Marcelo
Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani, José Humberto
Possati Resende, Júlio Cesar
Antoniazzi, Márcio
Longatto-Filho, Adhemar
Scapulatempo-Neto, Cristovam
author_facet Simonsen, Marcelo
Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani, José Humberto
Possati Resende, Júlio Cesar
Antoniazzi, Márcio
Longatto-Filho, Adhemar
Scapulatempo-Neto, Cristovam
author_sort Simonsen, Marcelo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of two cervical collection devices (Cytobrush+Ayres spatula and Cervex-Brush(®) Combi) for cellular sampling, transformation zone representation and accuracy in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+. METHODS: Cervical samples were collected from patients referred to the colposcopy unit of the Barretos Cancer Hospital between September 2013 and October 2014 using one of the two sampling devices. Additionally, colposcopy was performed with or without cervical biopsy and/or endocervical curettage. RESULTS: Biopsy was performed in 670 of the 1,235 patients submitted to colposcopy (54.2%). The Cervex-Brush(®) Combi was more effective than the Cytobrush with respect to endocervical cells sampling (82.7% versus 74.6%; p = 0.001). Sensitivity was also higher with the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi (48.6% versus 33.9%; p = 0.023) for predicting CIN2+ when high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were detected at cytology. CONCLUSIONS: Cervex-Brush(®) Combi was more effective than Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula for endocervical cells sampling and also had a slightly higher accuracy in predicting histologically CIN2+ lesions in patients with diagnosis of HSIL in cytology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5065172
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50651722016-10-27 Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology Simonsen, Marcelo Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani, José Humberto Possati Resende, Júlio Cesar Antoniazzi, Márcio Longatto-Filho, Adhemar Scapulatempo-Neto, Cristovam PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of two cervical collection devices (Cytobrush+Ayres spatula and Cervex-Brush(®) Combi) for cellular sampling, transformation zone representation and accuracy in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2+. METHODS: Cervical samples were collected from patients referred to the colposcopy unit of the Barretos Cancer Hospital between September 2013 and October 2014 using one of the two sampling devices. Additionally, colposcopy was performed with or without cervical biopsy and/or endocervical curettage. RESULTS: Biopsy was performed in 670 of the 1,235 patients submitted to colposcopy (54.2%). The Cervex-Brush(®) Combi was more effective than the Cytobrush with respect to endocervical cells sampling (82.7% versus 74.6%; p = 0.001). Sensitivity was also higher with the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi (48.6% versus 33.9%; p = 0.023) for predicting CIN2+ when high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were detected at cytology. CONCLUSIONS: Cervex-Brush(®) Combi was more effective than Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula for endocervical cells sampling and also had a slightly higher accuracy in predicting histologically CIN2+ lesions in patients with diagnosis of HSIL in cytology. Public Library of Science 2016-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5065172/ /pubmed/27741238 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164077 Text en © 2016 Simonsen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Simonsen, Marcelo
Tavares Guerreiro Fregnani, José Humberto
Possati Resende, Júlio Cesar
Antoniazzi, Márcio
Longatto-Filho, Adhemar
Scapulatempo-Neto, Cristovam
Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title_full Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title_fullStr Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title_short Comparison of the Cervex-Brush(®) Combi and the Cytobrush+Ayres Spatula Combination for Cervical Sampling in Liquid-Based Cytology
title_sort comparison of the cervex-brush(®) combi and the cytobrush+ayres spatula combination for cervical sampling in liquid-based cytology
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5065172/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27741238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164077
work_keys_str_mv AT simonsenmarcelo comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology
AT tavaresguerreirofregnanijosehumberto comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology
AT possatiresendejuliocesar comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology
AT antoniazzimarcio comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology
AT longattofilhoadhemar comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology
AT scapulatemponetocristovam comparisonofthecervexbrushcombiandthecytobrushayresspatulacombinationforcervicalsamplinginliquidbasedcytology