Background: The detection of vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) in cervical samples is not a common finding. Therefore, we aimed to report VAINs detected in liquid-based cytology (LBC) from women examined at Hos...Background: The detection of vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) in cervical samples is not a common finding. Therefore, we aimed to report VAINs detected in liquid-based cytology (LBC) from women examined at Hospital das Clínicas of Faculty of Medicine, Sao Paulo State University. Materials and Methods: We evaluated LBC samples from women referred to gynecology examination for different reasons (previous abnormal PapTest, follow up of treated cervical lesion, ecc) and women examined for regular screening proposals, and compared with biopsy diagnoses, including the controversial diagnoses of vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN). Results: From 1866 patients, 1423 (76.3%) cases were negative and 443 (23.7%) were positive for any cellular alteration. Age of patients ranged from 12 to 86 years. We detected 25 histologically confirmed VAIN (1.3% p = 0.0002 by Fisher’s exact test IC 95% 0.0090 - 0.0198) and 1.1% VAIN (p = 0.0031 by Fisher’s exact test IC 95% 0.0077 - 0.0179). Conclusion: The identification of VAIN in routine is feasible;the professionals involved with cytological examination should be aware of these lesions in Pap test samples.展开更多
文摘Background: The detection of vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) in cervical samples is not a common finding. Therefore, we aimed to report VAINs detected in liquid-based cytology (LBC) from women examined at Hospital das Clínicas of Faculty of Medicine, Sao Paulo State University. Materials and Methods: We evaluated LBC samples from women referred to gynecology examination for different reasons (previous abnormal PapTest, follow up of treated cervical lesion, ecc) and women examined for regular screening proposals, and compared with biopsy diagnoses, including the controversial diagnoses of vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN). Results: From 1866 patients, 1423 (76.3%) cases were negative and 443 (23.7%) were positive for any cellular alteration. Age of patients ranged from 12 to 86 years. We detected 25 histologically confirmed VAIN (1.3% p = 0.0002 by Fisher’s exact test IC 95% 0.0090 - 0.0198) and 1.1% VAIN (p = 0.0031 by Fisher’s exact test IC 95% 0.0077 - 0.0179). Conclusion: The identification of VAIN in routine is feasible;the professionals involved with cytological examination should be aware of these lesions in Pap test samples.
