New Screening Method For Cervical Cancer- Polar Probe

Year 2020, Volume: 47 Issue: 3, 587 - 595, 25.09.2020

Halis Özdemir Gonca Çoban Şerbetçioğlu Ali Ayhan

https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.799883

Abstract

New Screening Method For Cervical Cancer- Polar Probe

Abstract

Objective: Although extensive screening methods had been developed, cervical cancer remains to be an essential health problem. Early detection and administration of appropriate therapy is still a lifesaving procedure, especially for cervical cancer. The most common screening method for cervical cancer is still the cervical cytology (Pap-test). We aim to find out the advantages and disadvantages of a recently developed method, which is called as Polar Probe.
Methods: Two different approaches had been used (conventional Pap test and Polar Probe), and 1438 patients were included in the study. Of these, 819 had been screened with Polar Probe. All eligible patients were firstly screened using Polar Probe and then using the Pap test. Each patient with an abnormal Polar Probe result was referred to colposcopy room, where she was re-evaluated using colposcopy.
Results: The rate of abnormal smear result was 1.04%, and the corresponding percentage was calculated as 0.62% in LSIL, 0.34% in ASCUS, and 0.069% in HSIL. A total of 819 patients underwent Polar Probe, and the results were abnormal in 261 patients and normal in 558 patients. Abnormality rate was 1% in Pap test and 31.9% in Polar Probe. Although the positive predictive value was 27% for Polar Probe test and 16% for Pap test, as the colposcopy was indicated only for the patients with abnormal results in Polar Probe. The need for colposcopy dramatically increased with the use of Polar Probe.
Conclusion: Use of Polar Probe alone was not found to be cost effective. Combination with other methods of screening would decrease the cost of the process.

Keywords

Polar Probe, Pap test, pre-invasive cervical lesion

References

• 1.Cancer, I.A.f.R.o., Globocan 2018: estimated cancerincidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2018http://gco.iarc.fr/today/explore
• 2.Mirili C., Yılmaz A., Bilici M., Tekin S.B. Long-TermFollow-Up Outcomes of Cervical Cancer Patients: A Single Center Experience from the East Anatolian Region ofTurkey Dicle Med J 2019; 46 : 857–65.
• 3.Corneanu LM, Stanculescu D, Corneanu C. HPV andcervical squamous intraepithelial lesions:clinicopathological study. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2011;52: 89-94.
• 4.Long S, Lei W, Feng Y, Lv D, Cai Y, Yang P. Thefeasibilities of TruScreen for primary cervical cancerscreening: a self-controlled study. Arch Gynecol Obstet.2013; 288: 113-8.