International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research  |  e-ISSN: 2582-8940  |  Double-Blind Peer Review  |  Open Access  |  CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Current Issues
     2026:7/4

International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research

e-ISSN: 2582-8940 | Open Access

Comparative Study for the efficacy of conventional and liquid-based pap smear methods in screening of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) In Al Kut City

Abeer Hussein Maslat, Eman Abid Fahad Alhasnawi, Iqbal Abed Fahad

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Wasit, Iraq; PhD, Microbiology, Department of Medical Laboratory Techniques, Institute of Medical Technologies / Almansour, Middle Technical University, Iraq

Article Information

Volume / Issue5 / 3 (July-September 2024)
Pages66-71
AccessOpen Access

Publication Timeline

  • Accepted20 August 2024
  • Published

Full Text (PDF)

Open Access - Free to Download

Download Full Article (PDF) JATS XML

Abstract

Background: Although cervical cancer death rate has reduced globally, it is still a major concern in the world more so in Low and Middle Income Countries (LMIC). Screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia is important in the prevention of cervical cancer.

Aim: To compare and assess the two cytological screening techniques: The first one, the Conventional Pap Smear (CPS); the second one, the Liquid-Based Cytology (LBC) with the aim to determine how effective these two techniques are in the diagnosis of CIN before finally concluding which method was suitable for cervical cancer screening.

Patients, Material and Method: This work aims to assess and contrast two cytology screening tests; the CPS and LBC particularly in relation to detection of CIN. This study was cross-sectional and conducted over a 12 months at a private clinic in Al Kut city; thus, the institutional ethics committee cleared the study, and participants provided their informed consent. Respectively, 300 PAP test were done, only A total of 200 women with abnormal PAP test with colposcopic biopsy were analyzed, endocervical samples obtained using the CPS and LBC methods, LBC was shown to provide superior sample adequacy, sensitivity and specificity.

Result: Sample adequacy: in 200 cases. Adequate samples were obtained in 96% of the cases with LBC, and in 85% of the cases with CPS. As for CIN Detection Rates, LBC was more significant higher than CPS in detecting CIN (p < 0.05). Sensitivity and Specificity; LBC had a higher sensitivity today than CPS, 89% to 72%. LBC had also better specificity of 85% compared to CPS with a specificity of 68% the difference being statistically significant at p <0.05. In relation to LBC performance, Overall Performance shows an increasing upward trend of all parameters highlighting the fact that LBC is more accurate and efficient screening tool than CPS.

Conclusion: These results confirm that LBC is more effective than conventional liquid-based preparations as the preferred method in cervical cancer screening programs globally, although questions of cost and availability remain essential.

Keywords

Pap smearCPSLBCCIN

References

  1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. International Journal of Cancer. 2015;136:E359 -86. doi:10.1002/ijc.29210. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  2. Bruni L, Albero G, Serrano B, et al. ICO/IARC information centre on HPV and cancer (HPV information centre). Human papillomavirus and related diseases in the world. Summary Report. 2019;17. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  3. Dasgupta S. The fate of cervical dysplastic lesions International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research www.allmedicaljournal.com during pregnancy and the impact of the delivery mode: a review. Cureus. 2023;15:e42100. doi:10.7759/cureus.42100. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  4. Bal MS, Goyal R, Suri AK, Mohi MK. Detection of abnormal cervical cytology in Papanicolaou smears. Journal of Cytology. 2012;29:45-7. doi:10.4103/0970-9371.93222. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  5. Jain MA, Limaiem F. Cervical intraepithelial squamous cell lesion. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; c2020. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  6. Cooper DB, McCathran CE. Cervical dysplasia. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; c2023. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  7. Behtash N, Mehrdad N. Cervical cancer: screening and prevention. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2006;7:683-6. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  8. Sachan PL, Singh M, Patel ML, Sachan R. A study on cervical cancer screening using Pap smear test and clinical correlation. Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2018;5:337 -41. doi:10.4103/apjon.apjon_15_18. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  9. Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, et al. Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2018;320:674 -86. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.10897. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  10. Hashmi AA, Naz S, Ahmed O, et al. Comparison of liquid-based cytology and conventional Papanicolaou smear for cervical cancer screening: an experience from Pakistan. Cureus. 2020;12:e12293. doi:10.7759/cureus.12293. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  11. Dasgupta S. The Efficiency of Cervical Pap and Comparison of Conventional Pap Smear and Liquid-Based Cytology: A Review. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e48343. doi:10.7759/cureus.48343. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  12. Hassooni ZA, Fahad IA, Nussrat FL. Evaluation of liquid-based method in comparison with conventional method cervical cytology smears stained by hematoxylin and eosin stains. Annals of Tropical Medicine & Public Health. 2020;23(S24):SP232413. doi:10.36295/ASRO.2020.232413. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  13. Ikechebelu JI, Onyiaorah IV, Ugboaja JO, Anyiam DC, Eleje GU. Clinicopathological analysis of cervical cancer seen in a tertiary health facility in Nnewi, south-east Nigeria. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2010;30(3):299-301. doi:10.3109/01443610903531394. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  14. Federico C, Alleyn J, Dola C, et al. Relationship among age, race, medical funding, and cervical cancer survival. Journal of the National Medical Association. 2010;102(3):199-205. doi:10.1016/s0027 -9684(15)30526-5. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  15. Nayir T, Okyay RA, Nazlican E, et al. Cervical cancer screening in an early diagnosis and screening center in Mersin, Turkey. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2015;16(16):6909 -12. doi:10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.16.6909. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  16. Arbyn M, Ronco G, Anttila A, et al. Comparison of liquid-based cytology and conventional cytology for cervical cancer screening: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Cancer. 2012;1 32(4):983-90. doi:10.1002/ijc.27741. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  17. Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. American Journal of Clinical Pathology. 2012;137(4):516 -42. doi:10.1309/AJCPTGD94EVRSJCG. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  18. Zhao FH, Lewkowitz AK, Chen F, et al. Performance of high-risk HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening: A pooled analysis of individual patient data from 15 population-based studies. The Lancet Oncology. 2018;19(11):1367-76. doi:10.1016/S1470 -2045(18)30538-8. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  19. Limaye A, Connor AJ, Huang X, Luff R. Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. 2003;127(2):200 -4. doi:10.5858/2003-127-200-CAOCPT. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  20. Zhu J, Norman I, Elfgren K, et al. A comparison of liquid-based cytology and Pap smear as a screening method for cervical cancer. Oncology Reports. 2007;18(1):157-60. [Google Scholar][Crossref]
  21. World Health Organization. Cervical cancer: An NCD that can be eliminated. [Internet]; c2022. Available from: https://www.who.int.Copyright and License © The Author(s). Authors retain the copyright of their published articles. This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial-Share A like 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. [Google Scholar][Crossref]

How to Cite

Maslat, A. H., Alhasnawi, E. A. F., & Fahad, I. A. (2024). Comparative Study for the efficacy of conventional and liquid-based pap smear methods in screening of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) In Al Kut City. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 5(3), 66-71. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2024.5.3.66-71

Maslat, Abeer Hussein, et al. "Comparative Study for the efficacy of conventional and liquid-based pap smear methods in screening of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) In Al Kut City." International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, vol. 5, no. 3, 2024, pp. 66-71. https://doi.org/10.54660/IJMBHR.2024.5.3.66-71.

Maslat, A. H., Alhasnawi, E. A. F. and Fahad, I. A. (2024) 'Comparative Study for the efficacy of conventional and liquid-based pap smear methods in screening of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) In Al Kut City', International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research, 5(3), pp. 66-71. doi: 10.54660/IJMBHR.2024.5.3.66-71.

Maslat AH, Alhasnawi EAF, Fahad IA. Comparative Study for the efficacy of conventional and liquid-based pap smear methods in screening of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) In Al Kut City. International Journal of Medical and All Body Health Research. 2024;5(3):66-71. doi:10.54660/IJMBHR.2024.5.3.66-71

Similar Articles

Share

Find this Article on

Google Scholar Semantic Scholar OpenAlex Scilit Crossref ResearchGate BASE

A newly published article may take a few days to appear on these services.