medigraphic.com

2002, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Hosp Gral Quebrada 2002; 1 (1)

Quality of the cervical sample in the uterine cervix cancer program

Correa RP, García GA, Ramos OG, Santillán MA

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 32-36
PDF size: 38.57 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The cancer is a universal illness that doesn’t distinguish race, sex, cultures or socioeconomic state. In developed western countries, the mortality has decreased notably before a diagnosis effective cytological joined to another type of interventions of quality in its massive program of detection. Nevertheless of the accessibility of the test vaginal cervix, a problem that is informed with more frequency in the world literature is the discharge it appraises of negative false results in the routine cervical cytology, situation that involves among other things, the quality of the sample. The design is observational, prospective and transverse. Of June to December of the 2000, 420 cytologies were revised to determine the quality of the sample cytological by means of the approach of Bethesda. It was found that 85% was satisfactory and 15% satisfactory but limited. The combination of instruments spatula more tongue holder demonstrated better results for the taking of the sample.


REFERENCES

  1. SSA. Norma Oficial Mexicana para la prevención, diagnóstico, tratamiento, control y vigilancia epidemiológica del cáncer cervicouterino. NOM-0140SSA2-1994. Diario Oficial de la Federación 6 de marzo de 1998.

  2. Viesca TC. El Dr. Eliseo Ramírez y sus aportaciones a la citología. Patología 1989; 27: 117-23.

  3. Papanicolaou NG. A new procedure for staining vaginal smears. Science 942; 24: 438-9.

  4. Richart R. Influence of cell collection techniques upon cytological diagnosis. Cancer 1965; 18: 1474-8.

  5. Ahueda RJ. Citología cervical. México. Ginecol y Obstet 1997; 65: 227-8.

  6. Lazcano PEC. Índice de calidad en citología en una muestra probabilística en la ciudad de México. Patología 1992; 30: 201-3.

  7. Lazcano PEC. Programa de detección oportuna de cáncer cervical en México. I. Diagnóstico situacional. Cancerología 1996; 42: 123-40.

  8. Trujillo GJJ. El cáncer cervicouterino problema viejo, reto actual de la salud comunitaria. Salud comunitaria IMSS 1998; 2: 14-9.

  9. OPS. Manual de normas y procedimientos para el control del cáncer del cuello del útero. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. 1990.

  10. Montes SG. Eficacia del cepillo cervical en obtención de muestra endocervical en comparación con el abatelenguas. México. Ginecol y Obstet 1997; 65: 305-9.

  11. Olivas MG. Citología cervical: hallazgos dependientes del biocolector. México. Ginecol y Obstet 1997; 65: 515-9.

  12. Rui L. Contribution of the endocervical cytobrush sample to the diagnosis of cervical lesions. Acta Cytol 1996; 40: 1143-7.

  13. Buntinx F. Comparation of cytobrush sampling, spatula sampling and combined cytobrush-spatula ampling of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol 1991; 35: 64-8.

  14. Bonn EM. Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1989; 33: 843-8.

  15. National Cancer Institute. The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. Acta Cytol 1993; 37: 115-24.

  16. Barboza QO. El uso del sistema Bethesda en México. Patología 1998; 36: 341-2.

  17. Peluffo M. Sistema de nomenclatura Bethesda. ¿Adoptar o adaptar? CPCweb.com.ar. 2000.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com