Cervicography. Does it improve cervical cancer screening?
OBJECTIVE
To compare the reliability of cytology with that of cervicography and with the use of both tests when screening for neoplasia of the cervix and to analyze the causes of false positive and false negative results with both methods.


METHODS
The results of cytology and cervicography in 1,709 patients (1,447 seen for routine screening, 82 for follow-up after treatment for cervical neoplasia and 180 referred because of cytologic anomalies) were correlated with colpohistologic findings.


RESULTS
Cervicography entailed more defective examinations than did cytology (8.9% vs. 0.2%, P < .0001). It was less sensitive (51% vs. 59%, P = .320) and less specific (96% vs. 98%, P = .004). Whatever the clinical criteria (patient's age, parity, pregnancy or history of cervical treatment), the rate of false positives with cervicography was always higher than with cytology, as was the rate of false negatives, except in pregnant women.


CONCLUSIONS
Cervicography does not seem to offer a worthwhile alternative to cytology for cervical screening.
Baldauf
J J
JJ
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1, Hôpital de Hautepierre, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, France.
Dreyfus
M
M
Ritter
J
J
Meyer
P
P
Philippe
E
E
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001706:Biopsy / Q000592:standards; D002584:Cervix Uteri / Q000473:pathology*; D003127:Colposcopy / Q000592:standards*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000592:standards*; D008875:Middle Aged; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011247:Pregnancy; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000473:pathology* / Q000517:prevention & control*