Citologia oncológica, captura de híbridos II e inspeção visual no rastreamento de lesões cervicais

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Avaliar as alterações na citologia oncológica, na captura híbrida II e na inspeção visual com ácido acético (IVA) a 5% em 684 mulheres atendidas em uma unidade de saúde, e avaliar o desempenho e a concordância entre os exames. Procurar descrever as características sócio-demográficas e reprodutivas (SDR) destas mulheres e sua associação com a presença de doença. As mulheres foram submetidas à coleta de citologia, captura e IVA, e as com exame positivo foram submetidas à colposcopia com biopsia, se necessário. Foi calculado o desempenho dos testes e a associação dos fatores SDR com o diagnóstico histológico foi avaliada por intermédio do cálculo do odds ratio. Embora 198 mulheres apresentassem pelo menos um teste alterado, apenas 21 apresentaram lesão histológica. A sensibilidade dos testes foi semelhante enquanto as especificidades da IVA e da citologia foram maiores que a da captura híbrida II. Apenas a ausência de citologia esteve associada à presença de doença. O desempenho da citologia foi maior que o da IVA, que foi maior que o da captura. A ausência de citologia foi associada com doença histológica.

Translated abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate alterations in Pap smear, hybrid capture II (HCII), and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) in 684 women treated at a primary health care unit. The performance and agreement of the exams were evaluated. The study also described social, demographic, and reproductive factors and their association with uterine cervical lesions. Women had specimens taken for Pap smear, HCII, and VIA. When at least one of the tests was positive, colposcopy was performed and targeted biopsies were taken from any suspicious lesions. Performance of tests was evaluated. Women's distribution in relation to social, demographic, and reproductive factors and histological diagnosis was evaluated using the odds ratio. Among 198 women with at least one positive screening test, only 21 showed histological disease. Sensitivities of the tests were similar. VIA and Pap smear presented higher specificity than HCII. Only absence of a previous Pap smear was associated with the presence of histological disease. Pap smear performed better than VIA and HC II. Absence of previous cytology was associated with histological disease.

Related collections

Most cited references 3

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer.

W Lawrence, J Mandelblatt, Yeen Hwang … (2002)

Despite quality assurance standards, Papanicolaou (Pap) test characteristics remain less than optimal. To compare the societal costs and benefits of human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, Pap testing, and their combination to screen for cervical cancer. A simulation model of neoplasia natural history was used to estimate the societal costs and quality-adjusted life expectancy associated with 18 different general population screening strategies: Pap plus HPV testing, Pap testing alone, and HPV testing alone every 2 or 3 years among hypothetical longitudinal cohorts of US women beginning at age 20 years and continuing to 65 years, 75 years, or death. Discounted costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved of each screening strategy. Maximal savings in lives were achieved by screening every 2 years until death with combined HPV and Pap testing at an incremental cost of $76 183 per QALY compared with Pap testing alone every 2 years. Stopping biennial screening with HPV and Pap testing at age 75 years captures 97.8% of the benefits of lifetime screening at a cost of $70 347 per QALY. Combined biennial HPV and Pap testing to age 65 years captures 86.6% of the benefits achievable by continuing to screen until age 75 years. Human papillomavirus screening alone was equally effective as Pap testing alone at any given screening interval or age of screening cessation but was more costly and therefore was dominated. In sensitivity analyses, HPV testing would be more effective and less costly than Pap testing at a cost threshold of $5 for an HPV test. Screening with HPV plus Pap tests every 2 years appears to save additional years of life at reasonable costs compared with Pap testing alone. Applying age limits to screening is a viable option to maintain benefits while reducing costs.