Pap smear is a well known test in screening of epithelial cell abnormalities of
the cervix. However, adding other screening methods to this test may increase
the sensitivity and specificity of case finding. Current study has been
designed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the combination of Tru-Screen
and Pap tests in comparison to Pap smear alone in women referred for annual
screening. Methods: This case-control study was conducted in two groups of 66
and 73 women with epithelial cell abnormality and normal results on Pap
smear, respectively. Both groups were subsequently tested with Tru-Screen and
colposcopy. Positive finding in any of the three studies made the patient
candidate for biopsy as the standard diagnostic test. SPSS software was used
to analyze sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative
predictive value of TruScreen, Pap smear, colposcopy and the combination of
TruScreen and Pap tests. Results: 105 out of 139 women underwent biopsy. Of
these, 32 (30.5%) had abnormal result in biopsy. Combination of True screen and
Pap smear led to a sensitivity of 93.8% and specificity of 79.5% which means an
improvement in both parameters. False negative rate decreased to 6.3% but
false positive rate increased to 82.2%. Positive and negative predictive values
of the combined tests were 33.3% and 86.7%, respectively. Conclusion:
Combination of TruScreen and Pap smear is associated with a significant improvement
in both sensitivity and specificity for early screening of preneoplastic and
neoplastic cervical epithelial lesions.
Cite this paper
Allameh, T. , Khanjani, S. , Mohammadizadeh, F. and Refaei, E. (2013) Diagnostic value of the combination of TruScreen and Pap smear in screening cervical epithelial lesions: Does it add advantages over the Pap smear alone?. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 3, 341-346. doi: 10.4236/ojog.2013.33063.
 Mandelblatt, J.S., Lawrence, W.F., Gaffikin, L., Limpahayom, K.K., Lumbiganon, P., Warakamin, S., et al. (2002) Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. Journal of National Cancer Institute, 94, 1469-1483.
 Nanda, K., McCrory, D.C., Myers, E.R., Bastian, L.A., Hasselblad, V., Hickey. J.D., et al. (2000) Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: A systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132, 810-819.
 Quek, S.C., Mould, T., Canfell, K., Singer, A., Sklandnev, V. and Coppleson, M. (1998) The Polarprobe—Emerging technology for cervical cancer screening. Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 27, 717-721.
 Singer, A., Coppleson, M., Canfell, K., Sklandnev, V., Mackellar, G., Pisal, N., et al. (2003) A real time optoelectronic device as an adjunct to the Pap smear for cervical screening: A multicenter evaluation. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, 13, 804-811.
 Louwers, J.A., Kocken, M., Ter Harmsel, W.A. and Verheijen, R.H. (2009) Digital colposcopy: Ready for use? An overview of literature. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 116, 220-229.
 Comppleson, M., Canfell, K. and Sklandnev, V. (2009) The Polarprobe—An instantaneous optoelectronic approach to cervical screening. CME Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 31-38.
 Zanardi, C., Camerini, T. and Bucolo, C. (2001) TruScreen: A new ally in cervical cancer screening. Ginecorama, 26, 23-24.
 Addis, B.I., Hatch, K.D. and Berek, J.S. (2007) Intraepithelial diseases of cervix, vagina and vulva. In: Berek, J.S., Eds., Berek & Novak’s Gynecology, 14th Edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 561-600.
 Zlatkov, V. (2009) Possibilities of the TruScreen for screening of precancer and cancer of the uterine cervix. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiia (Sofiia), 48, 46-50.
 Pruski, D., Kedzia, W., Przybylski, M., Józefiak, A., Purol, M. and Spaczyński, M. (2010) Assessment of optoelectronic method and molecular test usefulness for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer detection. Ginekologia Polska, 81, 426-430.