medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2005, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2005; 47 (1)

Screening and follow-up for cervical cancer prevention in rural Mexico using visual inspection

Pérez-Cruz E, Winkler JL, Velasco-Mondragón E, Salmerón-Castro J, García F, Davis-Tsu V, Escandón-Romero C, Hernández-Avila M

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 39-48
PDF size: 104.28 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. To compare the standard cervical cancer screening procedure –the Papanicolaou test or Pap smear– with detection through visual inspection using acetic acid (VIA), and visual inspection with acetic acid assisted by Aviscope (VIAM). Material and Methods. The study was conducted between October 1998 and December 2000, in two Mixteca regions in Oaxaca, Mexico. A field trial design was used to randomize the two regions to either of the two inspection methods. In one region 2,240 women received VIA; in the other, 2,542 women received VIAM. Women positive to visual inspection and a subsample of women with negative results were referred for colposcopy and, if necessary, cervical biopsy. Statistical data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and comparison of groups using chisquared tests. Diagnostic values were obtained for VIA and VIAM, using as gold standards colposcopy and biopsy. Results. VIAM identified a higher proportion of women with a cervical abnormality (16.3%) than VIA (3.4%), as well as normal women (58.5% vs. 53.8%). VIA identified a higher proportion of women with benign changes (41.2%) than VIAM (19.6%). VIAM had a greater sensitivity (p›0.05) but lower specificity (p‹0.05) than VIA, using as gold standards col-poscopy and biopsy. Conclusions. The two study groups were comparable for age, parity and cytological results; however, visual inspection results were different between the groups: VIAM identified more lesions confirmed by biopsy. The diagnostic utility of VIAM and VIA was lower than expected. Training of clinical personnel in visual inspection is critical to improve the effectiveness of these screening methods. The English version of this paper is available at: http:/ /www.insp.mx/salud/47/eng


REFERENCES

  1. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Rascón-Pacheco RA, Lozano-Ascencio R, Velasco-Mondragón HE. Mortality from cervical carcinoma in Mexico: Impact of screening, 1980-1990. Acta Cytol 1996;40(3):506-512.

  2. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Moss S, Alonso de Ruiz P, Salmerón-Castro J, Hernández-Avila M. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: Why is it ineffective? The case of Mexico. Arch Med Res 1999;30(3):240-250.

  3. Lazcano-Ponce E, Alonso P, Ruiz-Moreno JA, Hernández-Avila M. Recommendations for cervical cancer screening programs in developing countries. The need for equity and technological development. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S449-S462.

  4. Coleman MP, Esteve J, Damieeki P, Arslan A, Renard H. Trends in cancer incidence and mortality. IARC Sci Pub 1993;(121):1-806.

  5. Arrossi S, Sankaranarayanan R, Parkin DM. Incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in Latin America. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S306-S314.

  6. Palacio-Mejía LS, Rangel-Gómez G, Hernández-Avila M, Lazcano-Ponce E. Cervical cancer, a disease of poverty: Mortality differences between urban and rural areas in Mexico. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S315-S325.

  7. Hernández-Avila M, Lazcano-Ponce EC, De Ruiz PA, Romieu I. Evaluation of the cervical cancer screening programme in Mexico: A population-based case-control study. Int J Epidemiol 1998;27(3): 370-376.

  8. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Nájera-Aguilar P, Buiatti E, Alonso-de Ruiz P, Kuri P, Cantoral L et al. The cervical cancer screening program in Mexico: problems with access and coverage. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8(5):698-704.

  9. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Moss S, Alonso de Ruiz P, Salmerón-Castro J, Hernández-Avila M. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: Why is it ineffective? The case of Mexico. Archives of Medical Research 1999; 30: 240–250.

  10. Lazcano-Ponce E, Alonso de Ruiz P, López-Carrillo L, Vázquez-Manríquez ME, Hernández-Avila M. Quality control study on negative gynecological cytology in Mexico. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;10:10-14.

  11. Bingham A, Bishop A, Coffey P, Winkler J, Bradley J, Dzuba I et al. Factors affecting utilization of cervical cancer prevention services in low-resource settings. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S408-S416.

  12. Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R. Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries. Bull World Health Organ 2001;79(10):954-962.

  13. Franceschi S, Clifford G, Plummer M. Prospects for primary prevention of cervical cancer in developing countries. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S430-S436.

  14. Wesley R, Sankaranarayanan R, Mathew B, Chandralekha B, Aysha- Beegum A, Amma NS. Evaluation of visual inspection as a screening test for cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1997;75(3):436-40.

  15. Sankaranarayanan R, Nene BM, Dinshaw K, Rajkumar R, Shastri S, Wesley R et al. Early detection of cervical cancer with visual inspection methods: A summary of completed and on-going studies in India. Salud Publica Mex 2003;45 Suppl 3:S399-S407.

  16. Nene BM, Deshpande S, Jayant K, Budukh AM, Dale PS, Deshpande DA. Early detection of cervical cancer by visual inspection: A population-based study in rural India. Int J Cancer 1996;68(6):770-773.

  17. Winkler JL, Tsu VD, Bishop A, Scott R, Sellors JW. Confirmation of cervical neoplasia using a hand-held, lighted magnification device. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003;81(1):35-40.

  18. Blumenthal PD, Gaffikin L, Chirenje ZM, McGrath J, Womack S, Shah K. Adjunctive testing for cervical cancer in low resource settings with visual inspection, HPV, and the Pap smear. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001;72(1):47-53.

  19. Belinson JL, Pretorius RG, Zhang WH, Wu LY, Qiao YL, Elson P. Cervical cancer screening by simple visual inspection after acetic acid. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98(3):441-444.

  20. University of Zimbabwe/JHPIEGO Cervical Cancer Project. Visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical-cancer screening: Test qualities in a primary-care setting. Lancet 1999;353(9156):869-873.

  21. Denny L, Kuhn L, Risi L, Richart RM, Pollack A, Lorincz A et al. Twostage cervical cancer screening: an alternative for resource-poor settings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183(2):383-388.

  22. Basu PS, Sankaranarayanan R, Mandal R, Roy C, Das P, Choudhury D et al. Visual inspection with acetic acid and cytology in the early detection of cervical neoplasia in Kolkata, India. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13(5):626-632.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com