Rapid rescreening of cervical smears as a quality control method

Rapid rescreening of cervical smears as a quality control method The use of a rapid rescreening method as part of an internal quality control programme is reported. During a 12-month period 33 976 smears were reviewed (90.9% of total workload). Two-hundred and nineteen reports were altered, with 23 dyskaryotic smears identified, a false-negative rate of 0.07%, a false-negative dyskaryotic rate of 1.7%. Smears reported as dyskaryotic were also subjected to the rapid screening method (with 86.8% correctly identified) as well as using the method to assess smears before the usual primary screen (with 67.2% of dyskaryotic smears correctly identified). Rapid rescreening as a quality control method is effective, and although it has limitations, should replace 10% proportional rescreening as the preferred daily quality control method of choice. La relecture rapide des frottis cervico-utérins comme méthode de contrôle de qualité Ce travail décrit l'utilisation de la méthode de relecture rapide dans le cadre d'un programme de contrôle de qualité interne. Pendant une période de 12 mois, 33 976 frottis ont été revus (90,9% du recrutement). Deux cent dix neuf comptes-rendus ont été modifiés dont 23 concernant des frottis avec dyscaryoses, ce qui donne un taux de faux négatifs de 0,07% et un taux de faux négatifs pour les dyscaryoses de 1,7%. La méthode rapide a été appliquée à la relecture des frottis initialement classés comme dyscaryotiques (86,8% ont été correctement identifiés) ainsi qu'a la lecture de frottis avant le screening primaire (avec 67,2% de frottis dyscaryotiques correctement identifiés). La méthode de relecture rapide utilisée comme méthode de contrôle de qualité est efficace et, malgré ses limitations, elle devrait remplacer la relecture de 10% comme méthode de contrôle de qualité de routine. Rasches Nachscreenen als Methode der Qualitätskontrolle Während 12 Monaten wurden 33.976 Abstriche durch rasches Nachscreenen überprüft (90,9% aller Abstriche). 219 Befunde wurden abgeädert darunter 23 neue Dyskariosen, Dies entspricht einer Rate falsch negativer von 0,07% und falsch negativer Dyskariosen von 1,7%. Sämtliche Dyskariosen wurden ebenfalls überprüft mit einer Ausbeute von 86,8%, während die Methode als Vorlauf vor dem normalen Screening 67,2% erfasste. Trotz ihrer Einschränkungen ist die Methode wirkungsvoll und sollte die übliche Überprüfung von 10% der negativen Abstriche ersetzen.     

Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme

Objective:  To evaluate the performance of rapid pre-screening (RPS) as a method of internal quality control in the cytopathological examination of cervical smears for cervical cancer screening.
Methods:  The sample consisted of 6135 cervical smears submitted to RPS and routine screening (RS) methods. The smears classified as negative in RPS and RS were considered final diagnoses, and were not, therefore, submitted to any additional review. The smears identified as suspect or unsatisfactory according to RPS were analysed separately by two different cytologists irrespective of the diagnosis reached in RS. Smears considered abnormal or unsatisfactory at RS were also reviewed. When both cytologists issued concordant diagnoses, this was considered the final diagnosis. Discordant results were analysed by a third cytologist and a consensus meeting was held to define the final diagnosis.
Results:  Taking abnormalities detected by RS as the denominator, RPS had a sensitivity of 63.0% for the detection of all abnormal smears and 96.7% for high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). When compared with the final diagnosis, sensitivity of RPS for all abnormal smears was 74.9% and for HSIL 95.0%. Of the 529 abnormal smears confirmed in the final diagnosis, 2.15% were detected only by the RPS.
Conclusion:  RPS is an effective alternative method of internal quality control with high sensitivity for the detection of more severe lesions. It also permits monitoring of the laboratory rate of false-negative results, and allows constant evaluation of the performance both of the pre-screening and RS cytologists.