中国基层医药
中國基層醫藥
중국기층의약
CHINESE JOURNAL OF PRIMARY MEDICINE AND PHARMACY
2012年
17期
2563-2564
,共2页
伍凤群%李永翠%梁燕梅%张旗炘
伍鳳群%李永翠%樑燕梅%張旂炘
오봉군%리영취%량연매%장기흔
宫颈肿瘤%醋酸染色
宮頸腫瘤%醋痠染色
궁경종류%작산염색
Cervical tumor%Acetic acid
目的 对醋酸染色后肉眼观察( VIA)与人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)、液基细胞学检查(TCT)宫颈癌筛查三种方案实用价值进行评价.方法 采用VIA、HPV和TCT对946例女性进行筛查,任何一项存在阳性均进行阴道镜检查,必要时加宫颈四象限活检及宫颈管刮术,以病理结果为金标准,病理组织学结果≥CINⅡ为阳性.结果 三种筛查方案灵敏度(73.1%、96.2%、88.5%)和阴性预测值(99.1%、99.9%、99.7%)差异均无统计学意义(均P >0.05);TCT的特异度(97.5%)和阳性预测值(50.0%)明显优于HPV( 93.5%、29.4%),HPV优于VIA( 87.0%、13.7%),差异均有统计学意义(x2=71.34、26.00、22.17、8.28,均P<0.05):HPV筛查方法发现真正的患者与非患者的总能力最强,TCT次之,VIA最差;VIA费用最低.结论 尽管肉眼观察技术存在较高的漏诊和误诊,但其成本低廉,就成本效果分析与HPV及TCT方案相比仍有实用价值.
目的 對醋痠染色後肉眼觀察( VIA)與人乳頭瘤病毒(HPV)、液基細胞學檢查(TCT)宮頸癌篩查三種方案實用價值進行評價.方法 採用VIA、HPV和TCT對946例女性進行篩查,任何一項存在暘性均進行陰道鏡檢查,必要時加宮頸四象限活檢及宮頸管颳術,以病理結果為金標準,病理組織學結果≥CINⅡ為暘性.結果 三種篩查方案靈敏度(73.1%、96.2%、88.5%)和陰性預測值(99.1%、99.9%、99.7%)差異均無統計學意義(均P >0.05);TCT的特異度(97.5%)和暘性預測值(50.0%)明顯優于HPV( 93.5%、29.4%),HPV優于VIA( 87.0%、13.7%),差異均有統計學意義(x2=71.34、26.00、22.17、8.28,均P<0.05):HPV篩查方法髮現真正的患者與非患者的總能力最彊,TCT次之,VIA最差;VIA費用最低.結論 儘管肉眼觀察技術存在較高的漏診和誤診,但其成本低廉,就成本效果分析與HPV及TCT方案相比仍有實用價值.
목적 대작산염색후육안관찰( VIA)여인유두류병독(HPV)、액기세포학검사(TCT)궁경암사사삼충방안실용개치진행평개.방법 채용VIA、HPV화TCT대946례녀성진행사사,임하일항존재양성균진행음도경검사,필요시가궁경사상한활검급궁경관괄술,이병리결과위금표준,병리조직학결과≥CINⅡ위양성.결과 삼충사사방안령민도(73.1%、96.2%、88.5%)화음성예측치(99.1%、99.9%、99.7%)차이균무통계학의의(균P >0.05);TCT적특이도(97.5%)화양성예측치(50.0%)명현우우HPV( 93.5%、29.4%),HPV우우VIA( 87.0%、13.7%),차이균유통계학의의(x2=71.34、26.00、22.17、8.28,균P<0.05):HPV사사방법발현진정적환자여비환자적총능력최강,TCT차지,VIA최차;VIA비용최저.결론 진관육안관찰기술존재교고적루진화오진,단기성본저렴,취성본효과분석여HPV급TCT방안상비잉유실용개치.
Objective To evaluate the values of visual inspection with acetic acid( VIA) and human papillomavirus( HPV) and thinprep cytology test( TCT) in the screening of cervical cancer.Methods VIA,HPV test and TCT in 946 women was conducted.Cervical biopsy or endocenical curettage( ECC) was performed in VIA positive women or HPV positive women or TCT positive women. The pathologic outcome was as the gold standard,and the out come more and equal to cervical intraepithelial neoplasia( CIN) Ⅱ were identified as positive.Results There was no significant difference among three groups in sensitivity rate( 73.l%,96.2,88.5% ) and negative predictive value ( 99. 1% ,99.9% ,99.7% ) ( all P > 0.05 ).The specificity rate (97.5% ) and positive predictive value ( 50.O% ) of TCT was better than those of HPV ( 93.5%,29.4% ),and HPV was better than those of VIA( 87.0%,13.7% ),and the difference had statistifical significance among three groups ( x2 =71.34,26.00,22.17,8.28,all P < 0.05 ).Conclusion Although the rate of missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis rate was higher than that of HPV and TCT,but VIA seems to be appropriate methods in the screening of cervical cancer owing to its low price.