Frequency of intraepithelial lesions in the follow-up of women with unsatisfactory cervicovaginal cytology

Abstract

Background: In Mexico, cervical carcinoma is the second leading cause of cancer death in women, which can be prevented if it is detected promptly with cervicovaginal cytology, however, this can be unsatisfactory even with neoplasia, so it is important to follow up to avoid underdiagnosing and delay treatment. In this hospital, this has not been previously studied. Objective: The objective of the study was to know the prevalence of lesions identified by cytology, colposcopy, biopsy, or hysterectomy, within 3 years after an unsatisfactory cytology. Materials and methods: Was reviewed the information about 156 cases of unsatisfactory cytologies during 2013 and 2014 that were followed up within next 3 years, at the General Hospital of Mexico "Dr. Eduardo Liceaga". Results: A total of 156 cases with follow-up were categorized the 1 st year in 119 (76.3%) negative, 27 (17.4%) positive, 1 (0.6%) atypical squamous cells cannot exclude a high-grade lesion, and 9 (5.8%) inadequate; the 2 nd year: 31 (79.5%) negative, 6 (15.5%) positive, and 2 (5.1%) unsatisfactory; the 3 rd year: 12 (92.3%) negative and 1 (7.7%) carcinoma. According to the method by which the definitive diagnosis was made at follow-up, negative results were obtained by cytology 85 (54.5%), colposcopy with cytology 6 (3.8%), colposcopy with biopsy 20 (12.8%), and hysterectomy 8 (5.1%); positive results were obtained by cytology 7 (4.4%), colposcopy with cytology 8 (5.0%), electrosurgical loop 4 (2.4%), colposcopy with biopsy 8 (5.0%), and hysterectomy 1 (0.6%). Conclusions: Unsatisfactory cervicovaginal cytology is associated with the presence of preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions during their follow-up 3 years after this result.

Cervicovaginal lesions among women attending obstetrics and gynaecology at Ho Teaching Hospital

“…The ASC-H rate recorded in this current study was almost similar to that in another study, which was 0.22% [12]. Also, this study recorded a rate of 0.16% for carcinoma, while a higher rate of 2.6% was recorded in another study [13].…”