Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Audit on Adequacy of Pap Smears

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Conventional Pap smear is a commonly done screening test for cervical cancer. Accurate interpretation depends upon the specimen adequacy which is considered to be the single most important quality indicator of “The Bethesda System (TBS)”.

Purpose

To audit specimen adequacy and compare results based on 2014 TBS.

Study Design

Retrospective audit from 1 April to 31 December 2015.

Methodology

Data was collected from case notes and Pap smear reports.

Results

A total of 146 Pap smears were done during the study period. Majority of the women (34 %) were between 41 and 50 years. Fifty-five per cent had a small family size of two children. Seventy-six per cent were premenopausal while 34 % were post-menopausal. Transformation zone/endocervical component (TZ/EC) was seen in 87 % of smears. Blood was seen in 2.7 % and inflammatory cells in 59.6 % of smears. All smears were satisfactory for interpretation by the cytologist. In the final interpretation, atrophic smears were seen in 2/146 (1.4 %), low-grade epithelial abnormality and high-grade abnormality were seen in one smear each (0.7 %). Colposcopy and directed biopsy were normal in both. A total of 43.8 % were normal. A total of 53.4 % were inflammatory.

Conclusions

In this audit, 100 % smears were satisfactory for interpretation and above the literature standard of 99.5 %.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fact Sheet—Cervical Cancer. National Institutes of Health, Updated Oct 2010.

  2. Aparna N, Vasavi B, Harendra Kumar ML, Sapna M. An audit of Pap smear cytology. J South Asian Fed Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;3(3):121–4.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nayar R, Wilbur DC. The Pap test and Bethesda 2014. Acta Cytol. 2015;59:121–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Crasta JA, Chaitra V, Simi CM, Correa M. An audit of cervicovaginal cytology in a teaching hospital: are atypical glandular cells under recognised on cytological screening? J Cytol. 2009;26:69–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Davey DD, Nielsen ML, Naryshkin S, et al. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: current laboratory practices of participants in the college of American Pathologists Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1996;120:440–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ilter E, Midi A, Halilogulu B, et al. Comparison of conventional and liquid based cytology, do the diagnostic benefits outweigh the financial aspect? Turk J Med Sci. 2012;42(sup1):1200–6.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Birdsong GG, Davey DD. Chapter 1: Specimen adequacy. In: The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology, definitions, criteria and explanations. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Weinstein LC, Buchanan EM, Hillson C, et al. Screening and prevention: cervical cancer. Prim Care. 2009;36:559–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Elias A, Linthorst G, Bekker B, et al. The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes. Acta Cytol. 1983;27:225–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening. 2nd ed, chapter 3. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2008. p. 87–88.

  11. Davey DD, Chair R, Austin M, et al. American Society of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology patient management guideline. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002;118:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Davey DD, Cox T, Austin M, et al. Cervical cytology specimen adequacy-patient management guidelines optimizing specimen collection. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2008;12(2):71–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dasari P, Rajathi S, Kumar SV. Colposcopic evaluation of cervix with persistent inflammatory Pap smear: a prospective analytical study. CytoJournal. 2010;7:16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kelly BA, Black AS. The inflammatory cervical smear: a study in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 1990;40(335):238–40.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Visakhapatnam, 530053, India

    Leela Digumarti & Sonali Susmita Nayak

  2. Chaitanya Medical Centre, Visakhapatnam, India

    Ramakoteswararao Nutakki

Authors
  1. Leela Digumarti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sonali Susmita Nayak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ramakoteswararao Nutakki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leela Digumarti.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Digumarti, L., Nayak, S.S. & Nutakki, R. An Audit on Adequacy of Pap Smears. Indian J Gynecol Oncolog 14, 38 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-016-0067-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-016-0067-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation