CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES

Rupali  Bavikar; Meesha Zaheer; Archana Buch; Rajeshwari Raishankar; Rumaanah Khan; Charusheela Gore

doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

2022, Vol: 6, Issue: 24

6/24Current Issue Online First Archive Aims and Scope Abstracting & Indexing Most Accessed Articles Most Downloaded Articles Most Cited Articles

Required files to be uploaded

Copyright Transfer Form

« Previous Article

Original Research

Int J Med Rev Case Rep. 2023; 7(1):

doi: 10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES

Rupali Bavikar , Meesha Zaheer, Archana Buch, Rajeshwari Raishankar, Rumaanah Khan, Charusheela Gore.

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the years, different studies conducted have established the advantages of liquid based cytology(LBC) over conventional preparations(CP) in cervical smears screening. However, the high cost of machinery required for the preparations still limits its usage in low-resource countries. This study aims to evaluate the performance of a low cost LBC method, EziPREP™ technique against conventional preparations for cervical screening.
MATERIALS & METHOD: This was a cross sectional study comprising of 300 consequtive cervical samples over a period of 2 year. CP smears were prepared as per the standard technique using ayre’s spatula while for LBC sample was obtained on endocervical brush followed by detaching the head of brush into the fixative vials of LBC. The LBC samples were processed as per the manufacturer's protocol. Both CP and LBC smears were stained using standard Papanicolaou stain & H&E stain protocol. Slides were analysed by two pathologists independently.
RESULTS: The unsatisfactory rate for CP was 5%, main cause being obscuring haemorrhage and inflammation, whereas on LBC samples it was 1.4%, owing to inadequate cellular material. Uniform distribution was more in LBC smears, with minimal overlapping.
The morphological details were comparable in both sets of smears.
The pathogenic organisms, like Gardenella(31%) & Candida(20%) were detected in more CP smears, Trichomonas was seen equally in both smears(3%).
There was a 98% concordance in cytologic diagnosis between CP and LBC smears.
Screening time was notably reduced in LBC smears (3±1minutes vs 5±1 minutes for CP)
CONCLUSION: This low-cost LBC method holds promise in providing monolayered cervical smears with a clear background. It might carve the way for inclusion of liquid based cytology methods for cervical cancer screening on a larger scale in the low resourse countries.

Key words: Cervical cancer screening, Conventional cytology, Liquid Based Cytology, EziPREP™

	ARTICLE TOOLS
	Abstract
	PDF Fulltext
	How to cite this article
	Citation Tools
	Related Records
	Articles by Rupali Bavikar Articles by Meesha Zaheer Articles by Archana Buch Articles by Rajeshwari Raishankar Articles by Rumaanah Khan Articles by Charusheela Gore
	on Google
	on Google Scholar

How to Cite this Article

Pubmed Style

RB, Zaheer M, Buch A, Raishankar R, Khan R, Gore C, . CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. Int J Med Rev Case Rep. Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Web Style

RB, Zaheer M, Buch A, Raishankar R, Khan R, Gore C, . CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. https://www.mdpub.net/?mno=20692 [Access: February 24, 2023]. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

AMA (American Medical Association) Style

RB, Zaheer M, Buch A, Raishankar R, Khan R, Gore C, . CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. Int J Med Rev Case Rep. Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Vancouver/ICMJE Style

RB, Zaheer M, Buch A, Raishankar R, Khan R, Gore C, . CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. Int J Med Rev Case Rep, [cited February 24, 2023]; Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Harvard Style

, R. B., Zaheer, M., Buch, A., Raishankar, R., Khan, R., Gore, C. & (2023) CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. Int J Med Rev Case Rep, Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Turabian Style

, Rupali Bavikar, Meesha Zaheer, Archana Buch, Rajeshwari Raishankar, Rumaanah Khan, Charusheela Gore, and . 2023. CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports, Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Chicago Style

, Rupali Bavikar, Meesha Zaheer, Archana Buch, Rajeshwari Raishankar, Rumaanah Khan, Charusheela Gore, and . "CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES." International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style

APA (American Psychological Association) Style

, R. B., Zaheer, M., Buch, A., Raishankar, R., Khan, R., Gore, C. & (2023) CONVENTIONAL CYTOLOGY VERSUS LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGY FOR EVALUATION OF CERVICAL SMEARS – A STUDY OF 300 CASES. International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports, Online First: 30 Jan, 2023. doi:10.5455/IJMRCR.172-1650453121

Author Login Reviewer Login About Publisher Editorial Policies Peer Review Policy Editorial & Peer Review Process Author's Rights and Obligations Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement Conflict of Interest Policy Plagiarism Policy Protection of Research Participants (Statement On Human And Animal Rights)Privacy Policy Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern Self-Archiving Policies Statement of Informed Consent Advertising Policy Terms of Use License Information Copyright Information



Copyright © 2023 International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports All Rights Reserved. Subject to change without notice from or liability to International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports. For best results, please use Internet Explorer or Google Chrome	Contact Information Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the International Journal of Medical Reviews and Case Reports editorial office as follows: Bulgarian Association of Young Surgeons (BAYS); National Center of Public Health and Analyses (NCPHA), floor 2, office № 31, Sofia 1431, Bulgaria. inkov@journalmedica.com Financial department is managed by International Sci Ink Press. It is a company registered in Bulgaria with registered no. 205414288 and registered address at 57 Antim I str., Vazrazhdane, Sofia, 1303, Bulgaria. Tel: +359883427500

Contact Information

How to cite this article