Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Pierre Martin‐Hirsch, Gerry Jarvis, H. Kitchener, R. Lilford (2000)
Collection devices for obtaining cervical cytology samples.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2
Z. Kavak, F. Eren, S. Pekin, Sevgi Kiillu (1995)
A Randomized Comparison of the 3 Papanicolaou Smear Collection MethodsAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 35
M. Hutchinson, L. Isenstein, A. Goodman, A. Hurley, K. Douglass, K. Mui, Florence Patten, D. Zahniser (1994)
Homogeneous sampling accounts for the increased diagnostic accuracy using the ThinPrep Processor.American journal of clinical pathology, 101 2
B. Davey-Sullivan, J. Gearhart, C. Evers, Z. Cason, W. Replogle (1991)
The Cytobrush effect on Pap smear adequacy.Family practice research journal, 11 1
L. Marchand, M. Mundt, G. Klein, Sonia Agarwal (2005)
Optimal collection technique and devices for a quality pap smear.WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin, 104 6
(2008)
The Bethesda System for Reporting the Cervical Cytology , ed 2 . New York , Springer , 2004 . 11 Understanding the Reporting Method of Cervical Cytology Based on the Bethesda System ( in Japanese )
A. Kothari, S. Karim, A. Gordon, F. Raslan, M. Abdalla, S. George (2006)
A comparative study of two devices used for cervical cell sampling raises some doubts about liquid‐based cytologyInternational Journal of Gynecological Cancer, 16
P. Dey, Stuart Collins, M. Desai, C. Woodman (1996)
Adequacy of cervical cytology sampling with the Cervex brush and the Aylesbury spatula: a population based randomised controlled trialBMJ, 313
(2004)
eds): The Bethesda System for Reporting the Cervical Cytology, ed
H. Altermatt, K. Wyler, R. Fravi, X. Liu, R. Kraft, E. Dreher (1997)
[Cervix cytology: Cervex Brush versus conventional cotton swab].Praxis, 86 24
K. Nance (2007)
Evolution of Pap testing at a community hospital—A ten year experienceDiagnostic Cytopathology, 35
K. Hatch, E. Sheets, A. Kennedy, D. Ferris, T. Darragh, L. Twiggs (2004)
Multicenter Direct to Vial Evaluation of a Liquid-Based Pap TestJournal of Lower Genital Tract Disease, 8
H. Fokke, C. Salvatore, M. Schipper, O. Bleker (1992)
The quality of the Pap smear.European journal of gynaecological oncology, 13 5
L. Neinstein, J. Church, T. Akiyoshi (1992)
Comparison of cytobrush with Cervex-Brush for endocervical cytologic sampling.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 13 6
C. Depuydt, Ina Benoy, E. Bailleul, J. Vandepitte, Annie Vereecken, J. Bogers (2006)
Improved endocervical sampling and HPV viral load detection by Cervex‐Brush® CombiCytopathology, 17
D. Ferris, M. Berrey, K. Ellis, L. Petry, J. Voxnaes, R. Beatie (1992)
The optimal technique for obtaining a Papanicolaou smear with the Cervex-Brush.The Journal of family practice, 34 3
Sarah Day, Darla O'Shaughnessy, J. O'Connor, G. Freund (2004)
Additional collection devices used in conjunction with the SurePath Liquid-Based Pap Test broom device do not enhance diagnostic utilityBMC Women's Health, 4
F. Buntinx, M. Brouwers (1996)
Relation between sampling device and detection of abnormality in cervical smears: a meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised studiesBMJ, 313
Jenifer Cannon, J. Blythe (1993)
Comparison of the Cytobrush Plus Plastic Spatula With the Cervex Brush for Obtaining Endocervical CellsObstetrics & Gynecology, 82
Kenneth Lee, R. Ashfaq, G. Birdsong, M. Corkill, K. McIntosh, S. Inhorn (1997)
Comparison of conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for cervical cancer screeningObstetrics & Gynecology, 90
C. Whitaker, E. Stamp, W. Young, Lesley Greenwood (2009)
Comparison of the efficacy of the cervex brush and the extended-tip wooden spatula with conventional cytology: A longitudinal studyCytojournal, 6
H. Kuramoto, N. Sugimoto, M. Iida (2011)
Screening for cancer of the cervix with simultaneous pap smear and colposcopy. The efficacy of pap smear and colposcopy.European journal of gynaecological oncology, 32 1
M. PARAISO, K. Brady, R. Helmchen, T. Roat (1994)
Evaluation of the Endocervical Cytobrush and Cervex‐Brush in Pregnant WomenObstetrics & Gynecology, 84
(2008)
Satis - factoriness and disease detection in the screening specimens of cervical cancer – comparison between liquid - based and conventional methods ( in Japanese )
M. Boon, J. Guilloud, W. Rietveld (1989)
Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears.Acta cytologica, 33 6
H. Kuramoto, Yoshiko Iwami, N. Sugimoto, Chizuyo Kato, Takashi Sugahara, M. Iida (2012)
Application of a New Liquid-Based Procedure (TACAS) for the Screening of Cervical Cancer: A Preliminary StudyActa Cytologica, 56
Joo-yean Park, E.‐H. Jung, C. Kim, Young Choi (2007)
Direct‐to‐vial comparison of a new liquid‐based cytology system, liqui‐PREP™ versus the conventional Pap smearDiagnostic Cytopathology, 35
(2008)
Understanding the Reporting Method of Cervical Cytology Based on the Bethesda System
Sharon Davis-Devine, Sarah Day, Amy Anderson, Ashley French, Darcy Madison-Henness, Naomi Mohar, Danielle Tansy, Adarsh Hiremath, Jeffrey Douglas, G. Freund (2008)
Collection of the BD SurePath Pap Test with a broom device plus endocervical brush improves disease detection when compared to the broom device alone or the spatula plus endocervical brush combinationCytojournal, 6
Objective: To find an appropriate sampling device for a liquid-based procedure in the population screening for cervical cancer, focusing on bleeding at sampling and the amount of cells smeared. Methods and Materials: 1,000 consecutive women who underwent primary screening were studied. The specimens were obtained with the cotton stick/Cytobrush® method in the first 500 cases or with the Cervex-Brush® in the following 500 subjects, and were processed using the Thinlayer Advanced Cytology Assay System (TACAS™) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Results: (1) Bleeding at cellular sampling using the cotton stick/Cytobrush and Cervex-Brush methods occurred in 1.2 and 8.8% of the cases, respectively (p < 0.0001). (2) The incidences of cells obtained with the two methods which covered the whole area, <1/2 and ≥1/4, and <1/4 of the observation fields were 55.4 versus 62.2% (p < 0.05), 14.6 versus 9.4% (p < 0.05), and 2.0 versus 4.0% (p < 0.05), respectively. (3) The incidences of endocervical or metaplastic cells obtained with ≥500 and <10 were 34.6 versus 20.0% (p < 0.01) and 9.4 versus 18.4% (p < 0.01), respectively. In cases of cells covering <1/4, incidences with <10 were 0 and 0.6% (n = 3), respectively. (4) Detection rates of abnormal cytology were 3.4 and 5.2% (n.s.), including atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in 2.4 and 3.2%. Conclusions: The cotton stick/Cytobrush is superior to the Cervex-Brush as a cellular sampling device for the TACAS liquid-based procedure.
Acta Cytologica – Karger
Published: Jan 1, 2013
Keywords: Sampling device; Liquid-based procedure; Thinlayer Advanced Cytology Assay System; Cervical cancer; Screening
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.