论文部分内容阅读
目的比较巴氏手工涂片和液基薄层制片筛查对宫颈癌及癌前病变的应用价值。方法巴氏手工涂片和液基薄层制片按相关文献方法进行。结果巴氏手工涂片检查4 965例,异常179例,宫颈病变发病率为3.6%,液基薄层制片法检查2 022例,异常101例,宫颈病变发病率为5.0%,巴氏手工涂片发现宫颈病变发病率明显低于液基薄层制片法法,两者比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);对LISH和HISL的诊断准确率,液基薄层涂片为93.8%(15/16)和100.0%(19/19),与巴氏手工涂片的84.0%(21/25)和89.5%(17/19)相比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论巴氏手工涂片检测较液基薄层制片筛查宫颈癌及癌前病变简便,但对LISH和HISL期的病漏检明显,有条件单位应开展液基薄层制片筛查。
Objective To compare the application value of Pap smear and liquid-based lamellar screening on cervical cancer and precancerous lesions. Methods Pap smear and liquid-based lamellae were performed according to the literature method. Results There were 4 965 cases of Pap smear manual smears, 179 cases of abnormalities and 3.6% of cervical lesions. There were 2 022 cases of abnormal smear and 101 cases of cervical smears. The incidence of cervical lesions was 5.0% The incidence of cervical lesions was significantly lower than smear-based thin-film method, the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05); diagnostic accuracy of LISH and HISL, liquid-based thin-layer smear 93.8% (15/16) and 100.0% (19/19) respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P <0.05) compared with 84.0% (21/25) and 89.5% (17/19) ). Conclusion Pap smear manual smear test compared with liquid-based lamellar screening for cervical cancer and precancerous lesions is simple, but the LISH and HISL disease missed the test significantly, the conditional units should carry out liquid-based thin-film screening.