Comparison of downstaging, pap smear, colposcopy and colpo-directed biopsy in the detection of cancer cervix

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26452/ijrps.v13i3.2498

Abstract

Cancer cervix accounts for 80% of female genital cancer and is the most common genital cancer. India accounts for 27% of the incidence all over the world. The mortality due to cancer cervix is 14.7%. To  assess the reliability of downstaging in early detection of the precancerous lesion. To correlate the findings in 110 women with unhealthy cervix by cytology, colposcopy directed biopsies. The work was carried out continuously over one year and 2 months. 110 women were evaluated. When Cytology was compared with Colposcopy, Cytology had only 38.8% sensitivity. Cytology showed higher specificity (98.4%). 95% of the patients with abnormal Cytology had abnormal colposcopy. Colposcopy showed a sensitivity of 96.3% and a specificity of 72.3%. Sensitivity was more than a Pap smear, but specificity was less than  a pap smear. Thus, colposcopy offers an excellent tool for evaluating cervical lesions. It is an easy and perspective method, and its importance lies in teaching, diagnosis and management of cervical lesions, neoplastic and non- neoplastic.

Keywords:

Pap smear, Colposcopy, Biopsy, Cancer

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

A B Miller. Cervical cancer screening program managerial guidelines WHO. Geneva, 6(14):44–52, 1992.

R Shalini, S Amita, and M A Neera. How alarming is post-coital bleeding - a cytologic, colposcopic and histological evaluation. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation, 45(3):205– 213, 1998.

M Londhe, S S George, and I Seshadri. Detection of CIN by naked eye visualization after application of acetic acid. Indian Journal of Cancer, 34(2):88–91, 1997.

P S Basu, R Sankaranarayanan, Roy R C Mandal, and P Das. Visual Inspection of Cervix with acetic acid and cytology in the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Kolkotta - India. International Journal of Cancer, 13(5):626– 632, 2005.

Sukhpreet L Singh, Nayana A Dastur, and Murari S. Nanavatti. A Comparison of colposcopy and pap smear: Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values. Bombay Hospital Journal, 42(4), 2000.

L S Massad and YC Collins. Strength of Correlation between Colposcopic impression and biopsy. Journal of Gynaecol Oncol, 89(3):82– 91, 2003.

P M Cristoforoni, D Gerbaldo, A Perino, R Piccoli, F J Montz, and G L Capitonio. Computerized colposcopy: Results of a pilot study and analysis of its clinical relevance. Obstet Gynecol, 85(6):51–51, 1995.

Kierkegaard, C Byrjalsen, Frandsen, K C Hansen, and M Frydenberg. Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology and Colposcopy on Cervical Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand, 73(8):648–651, 1994.

J L Benedet, G H Anderson, J P Matisic, and D M Miller. A quality control program for colposcopy practice obstet. Gynecol, 78:872–875, 1991.

L Seshadri, P Jairaj, and H Krishnaswami. Colposcopy in the diagnosis of cervical neoplasia. Ind Jr Cancer, 27(3):180–86, 1990.

A A Edebiri. The relative significance of colposcopic descriptive appearances in the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Int Jr Gynecol Obstet, 33(1):23–29, 1990.

A Stafl and R F Mattingly. Colposcopic diagnosis of cervical neoplasia. Obstet Gynecol, 41(2):168–76, 1973.

P Kushtagi and Fernandez. Significance of Persistent Inflammatory, Cervical smears in Sexually active women of reproductive age. The Journal of Obs and Gyn. of India, 52(1):124– 130, 2002.

A Vaidya. Comparison of pap test among high risk and non-risk female. Kathmandu university, a medical journal, 1(1):8–13, 2003.

S W Adadevoh and B K Forkouh. Cervical cancer screening; first results and future directions in Ghana. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 43(1):63–67, 1993.

Published

2022-09-12

How to Cite

Nithya R, Rajalekshmi M, & Nasreen Banu M. (2022). Comparison of downstaging, pap smear, colposcopy and colpo-directed biopsy in the detection of cancer cervix. International Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences, 13(3), 318–329. https://doi.org/10.26452/ijrps.v13i3.2498

Issue

Section

Original Articles