Adequacy of cellular material in split-sampling of cervical scrapings for routine cancer screening: an analysis of 702 smears

Objective: The aim of this study was to examine cells (split-sample) that were retained on sampling devices used to collect conventional Pap smears (primary smears) in order to evaluate specimen adequacy and cytological diagnosis of scrapings that are routinely discarded. Study design: Cervical scrapings from women attending routine cervical cancer screening were obtained using a cervical brush. Following primary conventional smear preparation, the same sampling devices were rinsed in Preservcyt solution (Cytyc) for subsequent monolayered thin smear (split-sample/discarded sample). The smears (conventional and ThinPrep® monolayer) were examined independently by pathologists and classifi ed using the Bethesda System. The diagnoses from discarded samples (splitsample smears) were then compared with the diagnoses made on primary conventional Pap smears. Results: 702 samples were studied. Cell abnormalities was found in 14/702 conventional smear and 12/702 split-sample thin smear. The adequacy of sampling in primary smears was 94.7% compared to 88.9% in split-sample smears. Six cases of Human Papillomavirus infection was found in splitsample smear, whereas only 5 cases found in primary smear. Cohen’s Kappa was 0.61 showing substantial agreement between both sampling cytological results. Conclusion: The cervical brush discarded after conventional smear retain adequate number of cells for diagnostic purposes.

Comparison of DR. HPV Chip Kit with hybrid capture II assay for the detection of human papillomavirus in clinical samples: a preliminary study

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is well known as an etiological factor for the development of anogenital carcinomas. The aim of our study was to compare the performance of USFDA approved Hybrid II (HCII) Assay and recently introduced DR. HPV Chip Kit for the detection of HPV DNA in clinical cervical scrapings from 40 patients. HPV DNA testing was performed using the automated HCII Assay system and DR. HPV Chip Kit. Taking cytological results as gold standard, it was found that HCII was more sensitive (36.4%) than DR. HPV Chip Kit (18.2%) although specificity was 100% with the latter method. In addition, both these molecular methods had comparable negative and positive predictive values. It was concluded that both HCII and DR. HPV Chip Kit have comparable specificity. However, sensitivity for detection of HPV in clinical samples with HCII is almost double as compared to DR. HPV Chip Kit.