Influência da adequabilidade da amostra sobre a detecção das lesões precursoras do câncer cervical
Data
2008
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Resumo
PURPOSE: to evaluate whether the sample adequacy influences the detection of precursor cervical cancer lesions. METHODS: a transversal study from January 2004 to December 2005. A number of 10,951 results of cervical cytotopathological exams from users of the National Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde, SUS) in Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil, was studied. These women had spontaneously looked for the services from the Family Health Program or from the Basic Units of Health. Samples were collected by medical doctors and nurses, through the conventional technique to detect cervical cancer. The analyzed smears were classified by the Bethesda System, the sample adequacy being defined along the routine screening and categorized as: satisfactory, satisfactory but presenting factors that might partially jeopardize the analysis, and unsatisfactory. Results were stored in the Epi-Info 3.3.2 program. The χ² test was used to compare altered results with the adequacy of the samples from cytopathological smears. Differences with probability of rejection of the null hypothesis lower than 5% (p<0.05) were considered as significant. RESULTS: From 10,951 smears, 51.1% were classified as having satisfactory adequacy for analysis, 46.6% as satisfactory, but presenting some limiting factors, and 2.3%, as unsatisfactory. The main factors which have partially jeopardized the analysis were: lack of endocervical cells (52.2%), dried smears (22.8%), purulence (14.9%), or smears with some thick areas (9.5%).
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Neoplasias do colo do útero/diagnóstico, Citodiagnóstico, Programas de rastreamento, Controle de qualidade, Uterine cervical neoplasms/diagnosis, Cytodiagnosis, Mass screening, Quality control
Citação
AMARAL, Rita Goreti et al. Influência da adequabilidade da amostra sobre a detecção das lesões precursoras do câncer cervical. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, São Paulo, v. 30, n. 11, p. 556-560, 2008.