201. Short interval between two Pap smears: effect on the result of the second smear? A prospective randomized trial
- Author
-
Florian Bergauer, Christian J. Thaler, Theresa M. Kolben, Christian Dannecker, Julia Gallwas, Sven Mahner, Jochen Moeckel, Berit Boettcher, Alexander Crispin, and Thomas Kolben
- Subjects
Adult ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Time Factors ,Uterine Cervical Neoplasms ,Cervix Uteri ,Sensitivity and Specificity ,law.invention ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,Statistical significance ,Cytology ,medicine ,Odds Ratio ,Humans ,Prospective Studies ,False Negative Reactions ,Aged ,Gynecology ,Observer Variation ,Vaginal Smears ,Pap smears ,030219 obstetrics & reproductive medicine ,Obstetrics ,business.industry ,Second opinion ,Obstetrics and Gynecology ,General Medicine ,Odds ratio ,Middle Aged ,Uterine Cervical Dysplasia ,Short interval ,Logistic Models ,030220 oncology & carcinogenesis ,Liquid-based cytology ,Female ,business ,Papanicolaou Test - Abstract
A repeat Pap smear is sometimes necessary after a short time interval or even immediately, when patients seek for a second opinion or due to study participation. Only limited information is available on the possible impact of a short interval between two Pap smears. Most institutions therefore practice a minimum time span of 6–8 weeks before obtaining a second smear since a short interval is commonly believed to be associated with an increase of false negative results in the second smear. Two consecutive Pap smears were obtained from 81 women. 41 smears were processed using the conventional technique, whereas liquid-based cytology was used in the remaining 40 women. Smears were independently evaluated by four different cytopathologists. We analyzed the effect of time interval, both processing techniques and inter-observer variance in cytological evaluation. While the result of the second smear shows a tendency towards a more benign outcome (odds ratio (OR) 1.436, 95% CI 0.972–2.121), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.07). No significant differences were observed between conservative and liquid-based cytology (OR 1.554, 95% CI 0.659–3.667, p = 0.31). There was considerable inter-observer variability, and the observer was a strong predictor of the cytological result (OR 0.632–5.083, 95% CI 0.355–8.975, p
- Published
- 2017