Loading…

Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology

Objective: To compare the diagnostic results of the ThinPrep manual method (TPMM) and ThinPrep automated method (TPAM) in liquid-based cytology and present the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Material and Method: A total of 1.500 randomized ThinPrep Pap tests that were screened manuall...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Türk patoloji dergisi 2020, Vol.36 (2), p.135-141
Main Authors: Ozcan, Zuhal, Kimiloglu, Elife, Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz, Erdogan, Nusret
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 141
container_issue 2
container_start_page 135
container_title Türk patoloji dergisi
container_volume 36
creator Ozcan, Zuhal
Kimiloglu, Elife
Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz
Erdogan, Nusret
description Objective: To compare the diagnostic results of the ThinPrep manual method (TPMM) and ThinPrep automated method (TPAM) in liquid-based cytology and present the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Material and Method: A total of 1.500 randomized ThinPrep Pap tests that were screened manually and archived in 2015 were reviewed by a blinded researcher manually and by the ThinPrep automatic method. Results: There was a 83.3% increase in the detection of ASCUS (Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) with the TPAM compared to the TPMM, and with respect to the reference results, the accuracy was higher for the TPAM than for the TPMM. We also noted a 33.3% increase in the rate of LSIL (Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and 20% increase in the rate of HSIL (High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) by the TPAM. Concordance was best between the TPAM and reference cytologic diagnoses. The sensitivity was higher for the TPAM and the specificity was similar for both methods. The false positive rate was higher for the TPAM than the TPMM but the false negative rate was higher for the TPMM. We determined a 30% gain in screening time per smear by the TPAM. However, rejection of many samples by the system, especially because of air bubbles, was a limitation of the TPAM. Conclusion: The TPAM has advantages over the TPMM as well as disadvantages such as limiting features and a high false positive rate. The TPAM should be supported by the manual method to decrease the false positive rate.
doi_str_mv 10.5146/tjpath.2019.01473
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmedcentral_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_9f8caeb8941e42c18589aa976b55391c</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_9f8caeb8941e42c18589aa976b55391c</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10511248</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-18d5b82fd5bcc25972be19a8d274a7ddc86f69236fd6eac68136a567c77460833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkc9q3DAQxk1paUKSB-jNL-CtxrL-nUpZ2iYQ6KU5i7Eke7V4JVfSBtynr71bCtFhNMw382OGr6o-Adkx6PjncpyxHHYtAbUj0An6rroFSlTDBCXv15yAbBgHdlM95Hwk2xNEAv9Y3VAQXDFCbqs_-3iaMfkcQx2HuhxcbT2OIebiTX0ufvJl2ZQThjNOdTbJueDDWGOwl_Zy8GFObq79CcdNyEsu7lT7UE_-99nbpsfsbG1cevVmRZilxCmOy331YcApu4d__1318v3br_1j8_zzx9P-63NjOpClAWlZL9thjca0TIm2d6BQ2lZ0KKw1kg9ctZQPljs0XALlyLgwQnScSErvqqcr10Y86jmte6ZFR_T6Uohp1JjWayen1SANul6qDlzXGpBMKkQleM8YVWBW1pcraz73J2eNCyXh9Ab6Vgn-oMf4qoEwgLaTKwGuBJNizskN_4eB6M1YfTVWb8bqi7H0L1H-mac</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Ozcan, Zuhal ; Kimiloglu, Elife ; Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz ; Erdogan, Nusret</creator><creatorcontrib>Ozcan, Zuhal ; Kimiloglu, Elife ; Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz ; Erdogan, Nusret</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: To compare the diagnostic results of the ThinPrep manual method (TPMM) and ThinPrep automated method (TPAM) in liquid-based cytology and present the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Material and Method: A total of 1.500 randomized ThinPrep Pap tests that were screened manually and archived in 2015 were reviewed by a blinded researcher manually and by the ThinPrep automatic method. Results: There was a 83.3% increase in the detection of ASCUS (Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) with the TPAM compared to the TPMM, and with respect to the reference results, the accuracy was higher for the TPAM than for the TPMM. We also noted a 33.3% increase in the rate of LSIL (Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and 20% increase in the rate of HSIL (High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) by the TPAM. Concordance was best between the TPAM and reference cytologic diagnoses. The sensitivity was higher for the TPAM and the specificity was similar for both methods. The false positive rate was higher for the TPAM than the TPMM but the false negative rate was higher for the TPMM. We determined a 30% gain in screening time per smear by the TPAM. However, rejection of many samples by the system, especially because of air bubbles, was a limitation of the TPAM. Conclusion: The TPAM has advantages over the TPMM as well as disadvantages such as limiting features and a high false positive rate. The TPAM should be supported by the manual method to decrease the false positive rate.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1018-5615</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1309-5730</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5146/tjpath.2019.01473</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31769500</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ankara, Turkey: Federation of Turkish Pathology Societies</publisher><subject>liquid-based cervical cytology ; manual method ; Original ; thinprep imaging system</subject><ispartof>Türk patoloji dergisi, 2020, Vol.36 (2), p.135-141</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). 2020 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10511248/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10511248/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,4024,27923,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ozcan, Zuhal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimiloglu, Elife</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erdogan, Nusret</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology</title><title>Türk patoloji dergisi</title><description>Objective: To compare the diagnostic results of the ThinPrep manual method (TPMM) and ThinPrep automated method (TPAM) in liquid-based cytology and present the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Material and Method: A total of 1.500 randomized ThinPrep Pap tests that were screened manually and archived in 2015 were reviewed by a blinded researcher manually and by the ThinPrep automatic method. Results: There was a 83.3% increase in the detection of ASCUS (Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) with the TPAM compared to the TPMM, and with respect to the reference results, the accuracy was higher for the TPAM than for the TPMM. We also noted a 33.3% increase in the rate of LSIL (Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and 20% increase in the rate of HSIL (High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) by the TPAM. Concordance was best between the TPAM and reference cytologic diagnoses. The sensitivity was higher for the TPAM and the specificity was similar for both methods. The false positive rate was higher for the TPAM than the TPMM but the false negative rate was higher for the TPMM. We determined a 30% gain in screening time per smear by the TPAM. However, rejection of many samples by the system, especially because of air bubbles, was a limitation of the TPAM. Conclusion: The TPAM has advantages over the TPMM as well as disadvantages such as limiting features and a high false positive rate. The TPAM should be supported by the manual method to decrease the false positive rate.</description><subject>liquid-based cervical cytology</subject><subject>manual method</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>thinprep imaging system</subject><issn>1018-5615</issn><issn>1309-5730</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkc9q3DAQxk1paUKSB-jNL-CtxrL-nUpZ2iYQ6KU5i7Eke7V4JVfSBtynr71bCtFhNMw382OGr6o-Adkx6PjncpyxHHYtAbUj0An6rroFSlTDBCXv15yAbBgHdlM95Hwk2xNEAv9Y3VAQXDFCbqs_-3iaMfkcQx2HuhxcbT2OIebiTX0ufvJl2ZQThjNOdTbJueDDWGOwl_Zy8GFObq79CcdNyEsu7lT7UE_-99nbpsfsbG1cevVmRZilxCmOy331YcApu4d__1318v3br_1j8_zzx9P-63NjOpClAWlZL9thjca0TIm2d6BQ2lZ0KKw1kg9ctZQPljs0XALlyLgwQnScSErvqqcr10Y86jmte6ZFR_T6Uohp1JjWayen1SANul6qDlzXGpBMKkQleM8YVWBW1pcraz73J2eNCyXh9Ab6Vgn-oMf4qoEwgLaTKwGuBJNizskN_4eB6M1YfTVWb8bqi7H0L1H-mac</recordid><startdate>2020</startdate><enddate>2020</enddate><creator>Ozcan, Zuhal</creator><creator>Kimiloglu, Elife</creator><creator>Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz</creator><creator>Erdogan, Nusret</creator><general>Federation of Turkish Pathology Societies</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2020</creationdate><title>Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology</title><author>Ozcan, Zuhal ; Kimiloglu, Elife ; Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz ; Erdogan, Nusret</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-18d5b82fd5bcc25972be19a8d274a7ddc86f69236fd6eac68136a567c77460833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>liquid-based cervical cytology</topic><topic>manual method</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>thinprep imaging system</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ozcan, Zuhal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimiloglu, Elife</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Erdogan, Nusret</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Türk patoloji dergisi</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ozcan, Zuhal</au><au>Kimiloglu, Elife</au><au>Igdem, Aysenur Akyildiz</au><au>Erdogan, Nusret</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology</atitle><jtitle>Türk patoloji dergisi</jtitle><date>2020</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>135</spage><epage>141</epage><pages>135-141</pages><issn>1018-5615</issn><eissn>1309-5730</eissn><abstract>Objective: To compare the diagnostic results of the ThinPrep manual method (TPMM) and ThinPrep automated method (TPAM) in liquid-based cytology and present the advantages and disadvantages of both methods. Material and Method: A total of 1.500 randomized ThinPrep Pap tests that were screened manually and archived in 2015 were reviewed by a blinded researcher manually and by the ThinPrep automatic method. Results: There was a 83.3% increase in the detection of ASCUS (Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance) with the TPAM compared to the TPMM, and with respect to the reference results, the accuracy was higher for the TPAM than for the TPMM. We also noted a 33.3% increase in the rate of LSIL (Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) and 20% increase in the rate of HSIL (High grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) by the TPAM. Concordance was best between the TPAM and reference cytologic diagnoses. The sensitivity was higher for the TPAM and the specificity was similar for both methods. The false positive rate was higher for the TPAM than the TPMM but the false negative rate was higher for the TPMM. We determined a 30% gain in screening time per smear by the TPAM. However, rejection of many samples by the system, especially because of air bubbles, was a limitation of the TPAM. Conclusion: The TPAM has advantages over the TPMM as well as disadvantages such as limiting features and a high false positive rate. The TPAM should be supported by the manual method to decrease the false positive rate.</abstract><cop>Ankara, Turkey</cop><pub>Federation of Turkish Pathology Societies</pub><pmid>31769500</pmid><doi>10.5146/tjpath.2019.01473</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1018-5615
ispartof Türk patoloji dergisi, 2020, Vol.36 (2), p.135-141
issn 1018-5615
1309-5730
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_9f8caeb8941e42c18589aa976b55391c
source PubMed Central
subjects liquid-based cervical cytology
manual method
Original
thinprep imaging system
title Comparison of the diagnostic utility of manual screening and the thinprep imaging system in liquid-based cervical cytology
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T22%3A06%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmedcentral_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20diagnostic%20utility%20of%20manual%20screening%20and%20the%20thinprep%20imaging%20system%20in%20liquid-based%20cervical%20cytology&rft.jtitle=Tu%CC%88rk%20patoloji%20dergisi&rft.au=Ozcan,%20Zuhal&rft.date=2020&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=135&rft.epage=141&rft.pages=135-141&rft.issn=1018-5615&rft.eissn=1309-5730&rft_id=info:doi/10.5146/tjpath.2019.01473&rft_dat=%3Cpubmedcentral_doaj_%3Epubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10511248%3C/pubmedcentral_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c418t-18d5b82fd5bcc25972be19a8d274a7ddc86f69236fd6eac68136a567c77460833%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/31769500&rfr_iscdi=true