薄层液基细胞学与阴道镜检查对宫颈病变的检查结果对比分析

Comparative study on test results of colposcopy and liquid based thinprep cytology in screening of cervical lesions

目的对比分析薄层液基细胞学及阴道镜两种检查方法在宫颈病变筛查中的价值。方法选取接受宫颈病变筛查的已婚女性792例，均进行薄层液基细胞学及电子阴道镜两种检查方法，以病理结果为参照，对检查结果进行对比分析，比较两种检查方法的敏感性、特异性及准确性等。结果1792例已婚妇女中，液基细胞学检查方法的阴性率85．2％，阳性率14．8％，阴道镜检查方法的阴性率90．1％，阳性率9．9％，阴道镜阳性检出率高于薄层液基细胞学（P〈0．05）。以病理结果为参照，薄层液基细胞学检查方法的敏感性、特异性及准确性分别为86．1％、91．8％和91．3％，阴道镜检查方法的敏感性为93．4％、97．8％和97．5％。薄层液基细胞学检查方法的敏感性、特异性及准确性与阴道镜分别比较，均低于阴道镜检查方法（P〈0．05）。结论液基细胞学及阴道镜检查法在宫颈病变的筛查中，阴道镜检查结果相对可靠。

Objective To compare and study the value of eolposcopy and liquid based thinprep cytology test （TCT） in screening of cervical lesions. Methods 1792 eases of married women were selected and detected by adopting new cypress automatic uhrathin liquid based TCT and colposeopy for screening cervical lesions. Pathology results being served as a reference, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of two methods were comparatively analyzed. Results The negative rate of uhrathin liquid base cytology was 85.2% and the positive rate was 14.8%. The negative rate of colposcopy was 90.1% and the positive rate was 9.9%. The positive rate of eolposcopy was higher than that of the uhrathin liquid based cytology （P 〈 0.05）. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the uhrathin liquid based cytology were 86.1%, 91.8% and 91.3% respectively, while the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of colposeopy were 93.4%, 97.8% and 97.5% respectively. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the uhrathin liquid based cytology were compared with those of the uhrathin liquid based cytology with a reference of pathology results. There were statistical significant differences between two methods （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion The results of eolposcopy are more relatively reliable than those of liquid based TCT in screening cervical lesions.