Abstract
Purpose
To compare the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), and accuracy of Pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and digital cervicography (DC).
Methods
This is a cross-sectional study on 100 women in the age group of 20–60 years, sequentially using the Pap test, the VIA, and the DC for screening. All women underwent colposcopic biopsy as the gold standard in comparing the methods.
Results
Of the total of 100 women with the mean age 36.0 years, 17 cases were recognized positive for abnormal cervical cell by gold standard. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of the Pap test, the VIA, and the DC were 23.5, 100, 100, 86.5, and 87%; 62.5, 98.8, 90.9, 93.2, and 92.9%; and 46.7, 97.6, 77.8, 91, and 89.8%, respectively, for cervical neoplasia.
Conclusions
The Pap test had low sensitivity but high specificity, whereas VIA had a high sensitivity in addition to being easy and low-cost. Adjuvant methods of screening such as VIA can be a valuable alternative to the Pap test for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM (2010) Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. doi:10.1002/ijc.25516
Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, Limpahayom KK, Lumbiganon P, Warakamin S, King J, Yi B, Ringers P, Blumenthal PD (2002) Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst 94(19):1469–1483
Ronco G, Giorgi Rossi P (2008) New paradigms in cervical cancer prevention: opportunities and risks. BMC Womens Health 8:23. doi:10.1186/1472-6874-8-23
Sasieni PD, Cuzick J, Lynch-Farmery E (1996) Estimating the efficacy of screening by auditing smear histories of women with and without cervical cancer. The National Co-ordinating Network for Cervical Screening Working Group. Br J Cancer 73(8):1001–1005
Almonte M, Ferreccio C, Winkler JL, Cuzick J, Tsu V, Robles S, Takahashi R, Sasieni P (2007) Cervical screening by visual inspection, HPV testing, liquid-based and conventional cytology in Amazonian Peru. Int J Cancer 121(4):796–802. doi:10.1002/ijc.22757
Nieminen P, Kallio M, Anttila A, Hakama M (1999) Organised versus spontaneous Pap-smear screening for cervical cancer: a case–control study. Int J Cancer 83(1):55–58. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19990924)83:1<55:AID-IJC11>3.0.CO;2-U
Denny L, Kuhn L, Pollack A, Wainwright H, Wright TC Jr (2000) Evaluation of alternative methods of cervical cancer screening for resource-poor settings. Cancer 89(4):826–833. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(20000815)89:4<826:AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-5
Denny L, Kuhn L, Risi L, Richart RM, Pollack A, Lorincz A, Kostecki F, Wright TC Jr (2000) Two-stage cervical cancer screening: an alternative for resource-poor settings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183(2):383–388. doi:10.1067/mob.2000.105871
McCrory DC, Matchar DB, Bastian L, Datta S, Hasselblad V, Hickey J, Myers E, Nanda K (1999) Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) (5):1–6
Parham GP (2003) Comparison of cell collection and direct visualization cervical cancer screening adjuncts. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(Suppl 3):S13–S20
Sherris J, Wittet S, Kleine A, Sellors J, Luciani S, Sankaranarayanan R, Barone MA (2009) Evidence-based, alternative cervical cancer screening approaches in low-resource settings. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health 35(3):147–154. doi:10.1363/ifpp.35.147.09
Chumworathayi B, Limpaphayom K, Srisupundit S, Lumbiganon P (2006) VIA and cryotherapy: doing what’s best. J Med Assoc Thai 89(8):1333–1339
Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R (2001) Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 79(10):954–962
Chen ZP, Chen HM, Lee TT (2008) Use of compact digital cervicography: an adjuvant screening tool for precancerous cervical lesions. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 47(2):187–191. doi:10.1016/S1028-4559(08)60078-9
Sankaranarayanan R, Gaffikin L, Jacob M, Sellors J, Robles S (2005) A critical assessment of screening methods for cervical neoplasia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 89(Suppl 2):S4–S12. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.01.009
Eftekhar Z, Rahimi-Moghaddam P, Yarandi F, Brojerdi R (2005) Accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) for early detection of cervical dysplasia in Tehran, Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 6(1):69–71
Sellors J, Lewis K, Kidula N, Muhombe K, Tsu V, Herdman C (2003) Screening and management of precancerous lesions to prevent cervical cancer in low-resource settings. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 4(3):277–280
Sankaranarayanan R, Esmy PO, Rajkumar R, Muwonge R, Swaminathan R, Shanthakumari S, Fayette JM, Cherian J (2007) Effect of visual screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Tamil Nadu, India: a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 370(9585):398–406. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61195-7
Sarian LO, Derchain SF, Naud P, Roteli-Martins C, Longatto-Filho A, Tatti S, Branca M, Erzen M, Serpa-Hammes L, Matos J, Gontijo R, Braganca JF, Lima TP, Maeda MY, Lorincz A, Dores GB, Costa S, Syrjanen S, Syrjanen K (2005) Evaluation of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Lugol’s iodine (VILI), cervical cytology and HPV testing as cervical screening tools in Latin America. J Med Screen 12(3):142–149. doi:10.1258/0969141054855328 This report refers to partial results from the LAMS (Latin AMerican Screening) study
Stafl A (1981) Cervicography: a new method for cervical cancer detection. Am J Obstet Gynecol 139(7):815–825
Cronje HS, Parham GP, Cooreman BF, de Beer A, Divall P, Bam RH (2003) A comparison of four screening methods for cervical neoplasia in a developing country. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(2):395–400
Aggarwal P, Batra S, Gandhi G, Zutshi V (2010) Comparison of papanicolaou test with visual detection tests in screening for cervical cancer and developing the optimal strategy for low resource settings. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20(5):862–868. doi:10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181e02f77
De Vuyst H, Claeys P, Njiru S, Muchiri L, Steyaert S, De Sutter P, Van Marck E, Bwayo J, Temmerman M (2005) Comparison of pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid, human papillomavirus DNA-PCR testing and cervicography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 89(2):120–126. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.01.035
Gaffikin L, Lauterbach M, Blumenthal PD (2003) Performance of visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical cancer screening: a qualitative summary of evidence to date. Obstet Gynecol Surv 58(8):543–550. doi:10.1097/01.OGX.0000079632.98372.26
Cronje HS, Cooreman BF, Beyer E, Bam RH, Middlecote BD, Divall PD (2001) Screening for cervical neoplasia in a developing country utilizing cytology, cervicography and the acetic acid test. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 72(2):151–157
Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, Matchar DB (2000) Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 132(10):810–819
Sankaranarayanan R, Thara S, Sharma A, Roy C, Shastri S, Mahe C, Muwonge R, Fontaniere B (2004) Accuracy of conventional cytology: results from a multicentre screening study in India. J Med Screen 11(2):77–84. doi:10.1258/096914104774061056
Acknowledgments
The study was supported by the Reproductive Health Research Centre of Shahid Beheshti Medical University and Nursing Midwifery School.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khodakarami, N., Farzaneh, F., Aslani, F. et al. Comparison of Pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid, and digital cervicography as cervical screening strategies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284, 1247–1252 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1793-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1793-6