Servikal premalign lezyonlarda tarama testleri ve biyopsi sonuçları arasındaki uyum: Üçüncü basamak tek merkez deneyimi

Year 2021, Volume: 18 Issue: 2, 776 - 779, 01.07.2021

Ayşe Nur Uğur Kılınç , Fatih Yılmaz , Melike Geyik , Elif Nur Yıldırım Öztürk , Yaşar Ünlü

https://doi.org/10.38136/jgon.804202

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç
Servikal premalign ve malign lezyonların erken tanı ve tedavisinde ve Pap (Papanicolaou) smear ve HPV tarama testlerinin önemi bilinmektedir. Bu çalışma ile üçüncü basamak tek merkez servikal tarama testi- biyopsi sonuçlarını karşılaştırmalı analiz ederek sunmayı amaçladık.
Gereç ve Yöntemler
Çalışmaya 3.basamak tek bir merkezde jinekolojik onkoloji polikliniğine başvuran ve kolposkopik biyopsi yapılan 272 hasta dâhil edildi. Olguların Pap smear sonuçları Betesta sistemine göre klasifiye edildi. HPV-DNA tiplendirmesi PCR yöntemi ile yapıldı. Tüm servikal biyopsi örneklerinden elde edilen H&E, p16 ve ki 67 boyalı preperatlar ışık mikroskobunda değerlendirildi. Sonuçlar istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırmalı analiz edildi.
Bulgular ve sonuç
HPV tarama testi, Ko-test ve Pap smear yöntemlerinin biyopsi ile uyumlarının karşılaştırılmasında HPV tarama testi anlamlı bulunmuştur (p<0,05). Ko-test ve Pap smear testi sonuçları anlamlı bulunmamıştır (p>0,05). Servikal smear testi genel topluma uygulanan bir tarama testi olup kuşkulu olgularda HPV testi yaptırmak serviks kanserini tarama açısından daha faydalı bulunmuştur.

Keywords

HPV, serviks kanseri, tarama testleri

The compliance between screening tests and biopsy results in cervical premalignant lesions: tertiary single-center experience

Abstract

Aim
The importance of Pap (Papanicolaou) smear and HPV screening tests in early diagnosis and treatment of cervical premalignant and malignant lesions are known. In this study, we aimed to present the tertiary single center cervical screening test-biopsy results by comparatively analyzing them.
Material and methods
The study included 272 patients who applied to the gynecological oncology outpatient clinic in a single third step center and underwent colposcopic biopsy. Pap smear results of the cases were classified according to the Bethesda system. HPV-DNA typing was done by the PCR method. H&E, p16, and ki 67 stained preparations obtained from all cervical biopsy specimens were evaluated under a light microscope. Results were statistically analyzed.
Results

The HPV screening test was found to be significant when comparing the compatibility of the HPV screening test, Co-test and Pap smear with biopsy (p <0.05). Co-test and Pap smear test results were not significant (p> 0.05).
Conclusion
The cervical smear test is a screening test applied to the general public, and the HPV test has been found more useful in screening for cervical cancer in suspected cases.

Keywords

HPV, cervix carcinoma, screening tests

References

• REFERANSLAR 1. Bruni L, Albero G, Serrano B, Mena M, Gómez D, Muñoz J, Bosch FX, de Sanjosé S, editors. Human papillomavirus and relateddiseases in the world. http://www.hpvcentre.net/statistics/reports.
• 2. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:359–86.
• 3.Findik S, Findik S, Abuoğlu S, Cihan FG, Ilter H, Iyisoy MS. Human papillomavirus (HPV) subtypes and their relationships with cervical smear results in cervical cancer screening: a community-based study from the central Anatolia region of Turkey. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, 2019;12(4), 1391.
• 4. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005;55:74–108.
• 5. Wittet S, Tsu V. Cervical cancer prevention and the millennium development goals. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:488–90.
• 6. Zhang L, Bi Q, Deng H, Xu J, Chen J, Zhang M, Mu X. Human papillomavirus infections among women with cervical lesions and cervical cancer in Eastern China: genotype-specific prevalence and attribution. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17:107.
• 7. Basu P, Mittal S, Bhadra Vale D, Chami Kharaji Y. Secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;47:73–85.
• 8.Yıldırım D. Gökaslan H. Serviks kanseri taramasında HPV DNA testinin yeri. Turk Jinekol Onkol Derg 2015;1:1–6.
• 9-Hayran M, Hayran M. Sağlık Araştırmaları için Temel İstatistik. 1. Baskı. Ankara; Omega Araştırma: 2011.
• 10. Bernstein SJ, Sanchez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B. Liquid-based cervical cytologic smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a metaanalysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:308–317, doi: 10.1067/mob.[phone].
• 11.Ghosh I, Mandal R, Kundu P, Biswas J, Association of genital infections other than human papillomavirus with preinvasive and invasive cervical neoplasia. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR, 2016; 10(2): XE01.
• 12- Murta EFC, Souza MAHD, Araújo Júnior E, Adad SJ Incidence of Gardnerella vaginalis, Candida sp and human papilloma virus in cytological smears. Sao Paulo Medical Journal, 2000; 118(4), 105-108.
• 13- Aslan DL, Pambuccian SE, Prekker FL, Schacker TW, Southern P, Savik K, Gulbahce HE, Accuracy of herpes simplex virus detection in liquid‐based (SurePath) Papanicolaou tests Diagnostic Cytopathology 2008;36.2:94-103.