Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cervical Health for a Lifetime: Smartscope a New Armamentarium

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

Abstract

Background

Cervical cancer is a major contributor to mortality and morbidity in women. PAP test is commonly used for cervical cancer screening having low sensitivity and subjectivity, lack of permanent record and over estimation. Here, Smartscope visual screening test is compared with PAP test. This study aims to compare SS test with PAP and its management in resource limited countries.

Materials and Methods

A prospective observational study conducted at MKCG MCH OPD over 8 months. About 96 women in the age group 25–65 years underwent PAP and SS test. Screen positive on any one test were subjected to colposcopy and biopsy.

Results

Out of 96 screened patients, 37 women were found PAP positive and 44 were tested positive through Smartscope (VIA and VILI), of which about 15 patients underwent thermal ablation and symptoms resolved in 13 of them. Out of 21 patients who underwent cervical biopsy showed a maximum of 58.6% as CIN I, 13.7% of CIN II with no case suggestive of advanced cancer. These patients were treated on the basis of SEE and TREAT approach and followed up.

Conclusion

SS test has greater potential as a primary screening test in low resource setting due to its better sensitivity and NPV as compared to PAP test.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ami YS, Singh R. A prospective study of comparison Pap’s Smear, Vili’s test and colposcopy in cervical cancer screening. Int J Med Res Heal Sci. 2016;5:50–7.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antal G, Kierski J, Stanley K. Control of cancer of the cervix uteri. Bull World Health Organ. 1986;4:607–18.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bae SN, Kim JH, Lee CW, et al. Correlation between the digital cervicography and pathological diagnosis performed at private clinics in Korea. Int J Med Sci. 2012;9:698–703.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Basu P, Banerjee D, Mittal S, et al. Evaluation of a compact, rechargeable, magnifying device to triage VIA and HPV positive women in a cervical cancer screening program in rural India. Cancer Causes Control. 2016;27:1253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bedell SL, Goldstein LS, Goldstein AR, Goldstein AT. Cervical cancer screening: past, present, and future. Sex Med Rev. 2020;8:28–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bhattacharyya AK, Nath JD, Deka H. Comparative study between pap smear and visual inspection with acetic acid (via) in screening of CIN and early cervical cancer. J Midlife Health. 2015;6:53–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Bobdey S, Sathwara J, Jain A, Balasubramaniam G. Burden of cervical cancer and role of screening in India. Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol. 2016;37:278–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Practice CD, No B. 168: cervical cancer screening and prevention. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:e111–30.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Davies KR, Cantor SB, Cox DD, Follen M. An alternative approach for estimating the accuracy of colposcopy in detecting cervical precancer. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fokom-Domgue J, Combescure C, Fokom-Defo V, et al. Performance of alternative strategies for primary cervical cancer screening in sub-Saharan Africa: systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Br Med J. 2015;351: h3084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Karimi-Zarchi M, Peighmbari F, Karimi N, et al. A comparison of 3 ways of conventional pap smear, liquid-based cytology and colposcopy vs cervical biopsy for early diagnosis of premalignant lesions or cervical cancer in women with abnormal conventional Pap test. Int J Biomed Sci. 2013;9:205–10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Lam CT, Krieger MS, Gallagher JE, et al. Design of a novel low cost point of care tampon (POCkeT) colposcope for use in resource limited settings. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lam CT, Mueller J, Asma B, et al. An integrated strategy for improving contrast, durability, and portability of a Pocket Colposcope for cervical cancer screening and diagnosis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13:1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mueller JL, Lam CT, Dahl D, et al. Portable pocket colposcopy performs comparably to standard-of-care clinical colposcopy using acetic acid and Lugol’s iodine as contrast mediators: an investigational study in Peru. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;125:1321–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nessa A, Wistrand C, Begum SA, et al. Evaluation of stationary colposcope and the Gynocular, by the Swede score systematic colposcopic system in VIA positive women: a crossover randomized trial. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2014;24:339–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ngonzi J, Bajunirwe F, Wistrand C, et al. Agreement of colposcope and Gynocular in assessment of cervical lesions by Swede score: a randomized, crossover pilot trial. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17:372–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Özgü E, Yıldız Y, Özgü BS, et al. Efficacy of a real time optoelectronic device (TruscreenTM) in detecting cervical intraepithelial pathologies: a prospective observational study. J Turkish Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2015;16:41–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Papanicolaou GN, Traut HF. The diagnostic value of vaginal smears in carcinoma of the uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1941;42:193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Parashari A, Singh V, Sehgal A, et al. Low-cost technology for screening uterine cervical cancer. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78:964–7.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Pimple SA, Amin G, Goswami S, Shastri SS. Evaluation of colposcopy vs cytology as secondary test to triage women found positive on visual inspection test. Indian J Cancer. 2010;47:308–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pourasad-Shahrak S, Salehi-Pourmehr H, Mostafa-Garebaghi P, et al. Comparing the results of Pap smear and direct visual inspection (DVI) with 5% acetic acid in cervical cancer screening. Niger Med J. 2015;56:35–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Pruski D, Przybylski M, Kedzia W, et al. Optoelectronic method for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer. Opto Electron Rev. 2011;19:478–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Qiao L, Li B, Long M, et al. Accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid and with Lugol’s iodine for cervical cancer screening: meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2015;41:1313–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sankaranarayanan R, Basu P, Wesley RS, et al. Accuracy of visual screening for cervical neoplasia: results from an IARC multicentre study in India and Africa. Int J Cancer. 2004;110:907–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffikin L, Jacob M, et al. A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2005;89:S4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sankaranarayanan R, Esmy PO, Rajkumar R, et al. Effect of visual screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Tamil Nadu, India: a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet. 2007;370:398–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sauvaget C, Fayette JM, Muwonge R, et al. Accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical cancer screening. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2011;113:14–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Singh V, Parashari A, Gupta S, et al. Performance of a low cost magnifying device, magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix. J Gynecol Oncol. 2014;25:282–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Tanaka Y, Ueda Y, Okazawa A, et al. ‘Smartscopy’ as an alternative device for cervical cancer screening: a pilot study. BMJ Innov. 2017;3:123–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Thay S, Goldstein A, Goldstein LS, et al. Prospective cohort study examining cervical cancer screening methods in HIV-positive and HIV-negative Cambodian Women: a comparison of human papilloma virus testing, visualization with acetic acid and digital colposcopy. BMJ Open. 2019;9:1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. WHO. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. 2019 https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-papillomavirus-(hpv)-and-cervical-cancer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, M.K.C.G. Medical College, Berhampur, Odisha, India

    Indira Palo & Tanguturu Sravani

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shri Jagannath Medical College and Hospital, Puri, Odisha, India

    Sairindri Sahoo

Authors
  1. Indira Palo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sairindri Sahoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tanguturu Sravani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanguturu Sravani.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 270 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palo, I., Sahoo, S. & Sravani, T. Cervical Health for a Lifetime: Smartscope a New Armamentarium. Indian J Gynecol Oncolog 22, 57 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-024-00826-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40944-024-00826-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation