Search

Background: To evaluate the performance of Siriraj liquid-based cytology (LBC) for cervical neoplasia screening after increasing use of this technology., Materials and Methods: Cytological reports of 103,057 Siriraj-LBC specimens obtained in 2007-2009 were compared with those of 23,676 specimens obtained in 2006., Results: Comparing with the year 2006, the 2007-2009 patients were slightly older (43.4 ± 12.yr vs 42.7 ± 12.2 yr, p <0.001), and their specimens had much lower proportion of unsatisfactory slides (OR=0.06, 95%CI 0.04-0.09) with comparable detection rates (3.96% vs 3.70%, p=0.052) but different proportions of various cytological abnormalities (p<0.001). The 2007-2009 Siriraj-LBC had a negative predictive value (NPV) for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2+ (CIN2+) of 97.6% and an overall positive predictive value (PPV) of 43.9%. The PPV for CIN2+ varied with types of abnormal cytology, from 13.7% to 93.8% in atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS), low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL), atypical squamous cells cannot exclude HSIL (ASC-H), high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL), atypical glandular cells (AGC), to squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), respectively. The PPVs for CIN2+ in ASCUS and LSIL were comparable, but the PPV for CIN1 was higher for LSIL than for ASCUS (41.63% vs 16.32%)., Conclusions: Siriraj-LBC has demonstrated a stable detection rate and NPV for CIN2+ of >95% since the first year of use. The comparable PPVs for CIN2+ of ASCUS and LSIL suggests that these two conditions may undergo similar management; other cytological abnormalities need immediate evaluation.

Aim: To evaluate the agreement between colposcopic diagnosis and cervical pathology a retrospective chart review was performed., Materials and Methods: This study included 437 patients who underwent colposcopy and cervical biopsy or conization at Siriraj Hospital from October 2010 - December 2012. The patient clinical characteristics, cervical cytology results, colposcopic diagnoses, cervical pathology results were recorded and correlations between variables were analyzed., Results: Agreement of colposcopic diagnosis and cervical pathology was matched in 253 patients (57.9%). The strength of agreement with weighted Kappa statistic was 0.494 (p<0.001). Colposcopic diagnoses more often overestimated (31.1%) than underestimated (11%) the cervical pathology. Agreement of colposcopic diagnosis and cervical pathology within 1 grade was found in 411 patients (94.1%). Positive predictive value (PPV) of high grade colposcopy or more was 75.5%, whereas the negative predictive value (NPV) of insignificant and low grade colposcopy was 83.8%. False positives of high grade colposcopy or more were 21%. False negatives of insignificant or low grade colposcopy were 19.1%., Conclusions: Strength of agreement between colposcopic diagnosis and cervical pathology was found to be only moderate. A biopsy at colposcopy should be performed at a gold standard level to detect high grade lesions.

Aim: To report long term outcomes of laser conization for high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) in Thai women., Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients undergoing laser conization due to abnormal cervical cytology suggesting neoplasia during 1989 to 1994 and having follow-up data until December 2010. Conization was performed under colposcopy using a 0.5-mm CO2 laser beam with power density of 18,000-20,000 watts/cm2, and the surgical base was vaporized using a low power defocused beam. The follow-up protocol included cervical cytology and colposcopy. Long term outcome measures were failure rate (persistence and recurrence), post-conization status of transformation zone, and obstetric outcomes., Results: Of 104 patients undergoing conization, 71 had therapeutic conization for high grade CIN and were followed up for a median time of 115 (range 12-260) months. There was one case of persistent and one of recurrent disease comprising a failure rate of 2.8%. The post treatment transformation zone was well visualized in 68.3% of 63 patients with an intact uterus. Sixteen patients achieved 25 pregnancies; none had second trimester miscarriage. The obstetric outcomes were unremarkable., Conclusions: Laser conization under colposcopic visualization for the treatment of high grade CIN in Thai women has a low failure rate of 2.8%. The post-conization transformation zone could not be evaluated completely in approximately 30% of cases; therefore the follow-up protocol should include both cytology and colposcopy. Obstetric outcomes are not adversely affected by this therapeutic procedure.

This study aimed to evaluate the correlation and agreement between Siriraj liquid-based cervical cytology (Siriraj -LBC) and conventional cytology. A total of 479 women who attended the Department of Obstetric and Gynaecology Siriraj Hospital for cervical cancer screening were enrolled. For each woman collection of cervical cells was performed using VCE technique. After smearing cells on a glass slide for conventional cytology, both broken ends of wooden spatula and cotton swabs were then placed into a plastic vial containing a specific preservative solution for Siriraj-LBC. All specimens were prepared and interpreted by experienced cytotechnologists at the Gynecologic Cytology Unit. Interpretations of the results from one technique were made without knowledge of those from the other technique. The results from both techniques were compared for agreement and correlation. Colposcopy or histology was used as the gold standard. The overall detection rate of abnormal cervicovaginal cells was higher by Siriraj-LBC than by conventional cytology (11.1% vs. 1.67%, P <0.001). These two techniques had high diagnostic agreement of 89.77%, and minimal to fair correlation with a Kappa of 0.128 (P<0.001) and a Spearman rho correlation coefficient of 0.394 (P <0.001). There were 49 cases whose Siriraj-LBC revealed higher cytologic grading than did the conventional cytology; there were no cases of the opposite result. The gold standard was available in 45 cases with abnormal cytology by Siriraj-LBC, revealing a positive predictive value (PPV) of 71.1% for Siriraj-LBC and 97.8% for conventional cytology, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 42.2% for the conventional cytology. In conclusion, The results from Siriraj-LBC and conventional cytology have high diagnostic agreement and minimal to fair correlation. The Siriraj-LBC increases detection rate of abnormal cervicovaginal cells with probable decrease in false negatives but increase in false positives from the baseline values by conventional cytology. Therefore the screening performance of Siriraj-LBC is not inferior to the conventional cytology and this approach may be used as an alternative screening method for cervical cancer.