The Korean Journal of Cytopathology (대한세포병리학회지)

The Korean Society for Cytopathology (대한세포병리학회)
권호 표지

Sensitivity of AutoPap Primary Screening System with Location-Guided Screening in Uterine Cervical Cytology

자궁목세포진에서의 AutoPap Primary Screening System with Location-Guided Screening의 민감도 검사

  • Choi, Jong-Sun (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Jang, Hoi-Sook (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hy-Sook (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Chun, Yi-Kyeong (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hye-Sun (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Ji-Young (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Park, In-Sou (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine) ;
  • Hong, Sung-Ran (Department of Pathology, Samsung Cheil Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
  • 최종순 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 장회숙 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 김희숙 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 전이경 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 김혜선 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 박지영 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과) ;
  • 박인서 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 산부인과) ;
  • 홍성란 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성제일병원 병리과)
  • Published : 2003.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The sensitivity of the AutoPap Primary Screening System with Location-Guided Screening (AutoPap LGS) for Identifying atypical cells in cervicovaginal smears was evaluated. Methods: Two hundred forty one slides with atypical cervical cytology randomly sampled were rescreened both manually and by the AutoPap LGS. The AutoPap LGS localized the atypical cells as 15 fields of view(FOVs), which were reexamined by manual review. The sensitivity was also evaluated in accordance with the cellularity of the smears. Results: The AutoPap LGS successfully processed 232 out of 241 slides. The sensitivity of the AutoPap LGS identifying the atypical cells in successfully processed slides was 97.4%(226/232). The false negative rate was 2.6%(6/232). There was no false negative case on high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) or squamous cell carcinoma(SCC) smears in the AutoPap LGS. The FOVs localized the diagnostic-atypical cells in 97.8%(221/226). The number of diagnostic-atypical FOVs was increased in higher-degree of atypical cytology. The AutoPap LGS localized the atypical cells in 100% of adequately cellular smears and in 92.5% even in low cellular smears. Conclusion: The AutoPap LGS showed relatively good sensitivity to detect atypical cells. It can be a valuable system to localize atypical cells, especially in HSIL or cancer slides, even in smears with low cellularity.

Keywords

References

  1. Patten SF, Lee JSJ, Wilbur DC, et al. The AutoPap 300 QC system multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears. Cancer 1997;81:343-7 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971225)81:6<343::AID-CNCR8>3.0.CO;2-M
  2. 홍성란, 박종숙, 장회숙 등. 자궁경부세포진에 있어서 AutoPap 300 QC System 의 임상경험과 민감도 검사. 대한세포병리학회지 1998;9:37-44
  3. Bartels PH, Bibbo M, Hutchinson ML. Computer screening devices and performance assessment: Development of a policy towards automation. Acta Cytol 1998;42:59-68 https://doi.org/10.1159/000331535
  4. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda System: Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-9 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.16.2114
  5. Wilbur DC, Prey MU, Miller WM, Pawlick GF, Colgan TJ. The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology: Comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice. Acta Cytol 1998;42:214-20 https://doi.org/10.1159/000331549
  6. Lee JSJ, Kuan L, Oh S, Patten FW, Wilbur DC. A feasibility study of the AutoPap System location-guided screening. Acta Cytol 1998;42:221-6 https://doi.org/10.1159/000331550
  7. Ronco G, Vineis C, Montanari G, et al. Impact of the AutoPap (currently focalpoint) Primary Screening System Location Guide use on interpretation time and diagnosis. Cancer 2003;99:83-8 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11057
  8. 김희수, 백희수, 손찬우 등. 조직학적으로 확진된 자궁경부 상피내종양 및 침윤암 1,000 예에서 평가한 자궁경부 세포진검사의 위음성률에 관한 연구, 대한부인종양콜포스코피학회지 1995;6:31-7
  9. Renshaw AA. Measuring sensitivity in gynecologic cytology. Cancer 2002;96:210-7 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.10717
  10. Renshaw AA, Lezon KM, Wilbur DC. The human false negative rate of rescreening in a two arm prospective clinical trial. Cancer 2001;93: 106-10 https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.9015
  11. Yobs AR, Plott AE, Hicklin MD, et al. Retrospective evaluation of gynecologic cytodiagnosis II. Interlaboratory reproducibility as shown in rescreening large consecutive samples of reported cases. Acta Cytol 1987;31:900-10
  12. Keenlyside RA, Collins CL, Hancock JS, et al. Do proficiency test results correlate with the work performance of screeners who screen Papanicolaou smears? Am J Clin Pathol 1999;112:769-76