A comparative study of conventional and liquid-based cervical cytology

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorBudak, Mehmet Sukru
dc.contributor.authorSenturk, Mehmet B.
dc.contributor.authorKaya, Cihan
dc.contributor.authorAkgol, Sedat
dc.contributor.authorBademkiran, Muhammed H.
dc.contributor.authorTahaoglu, Ali Emre
dc.contributor.authorYildirim, Ayhan
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:33:10Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:33:10Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The aim of our study is the comparison of the results of conventional smear (CC) technique and liquid-based cytology (LBC) technique used as cervical cancer screening methods. Material and methods: The results of 47954 patients submitted to smear screening in our gynecology clinic between January 2008 and December 2014 have been studied. The smear results have been divided into two groups CC and LBC according to the technique used. Results: When considering the distribution within CC group, the results were as follows: intraepithelial cell abnormalities 2,0% (n=619), insufficient sample for analysis 2,1% (n=660), Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASC-US) 1.8% (n=554), Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LGSIL) 0.1% (n=35), High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HGSIL) 0.1% (n=16), Atypical squamous cells - cannot exclude HGSIL (ASC-H) 0.029% (n=9), Atypical glandular cells-not other wise specified (AGC-NOS) 0.012% (n=4), squamous carcinoma 0.003% (n=1). When considering the distribution in LBC group, the results were as follows: intraepithelial cell abnormalities2.1% (n=357), insufficient sample for analysis 0.9% (n=144), ASC-US 1.8% (n=296), LGSIL 0.2% (n=38), HGSIL 0.1% (n=8), ASC-H 0.1% (n=10), AGC-NOS 0.017% (n=3), squamous carcinoma 0.011% (n=2). Conclusions: Although the rates of epithelial cell abnormalities are similar for both tests, LSIL results are more frequently observed in LBC technique. In LBC technique, the number of insufficient sample for analysis is quite low compared to CC group and thus constitutes an advantage.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage193en_US
dc.identifier.issn0017-0011
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid27306127
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84973548479
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.startpage190en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/20495
dc.identifier.volume87en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000374771700004
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherVia Medicaen_US
dc.relation.ispartofGinekologia Polska
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectCervical Intraepithelial Neoplasiaen_US
dc.subjectConventional Smearen_US
dc.subjectLiquid-Based Smearen_US
dc.titleA comparative study of conventional and liquid-based cervical cytologyen_US
dc.titleA comparative study of conventional and liquid-based cervical cytology
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu