Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Frottis conventionnel ou milieu liquide?

  • Chapter
Le dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus

Part of the book series: Dépistage et cancer ((DC))

  • 295 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Références

  1. Rousseau A, Bohet P, Merlière J et al. (2002) Évaluation du dépistage organisé et du dépistage individuel du cancer du col de l’utérus: utilité des données de l’assurance maladie. BEH 19: 81–3

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abenhaim L (2003) Rapport de la Commission d’orientation sur le cancer. Paris: Direction générale de la santé

    Google Scholar 

  3. Exbrayat C (2003) Col de l’utérus. In: Évolution de l’incidence et de la mortalité par cancer en France de 1978 à 2000. St Maurice: InVS 107–12

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sawaya GF, Grimes D (1999) New technologies in cervical cytology screening: a word of caution. Obstet Gynecol 94: 307–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Fender M, Schott J, Baldauf JJ et al. (2003) EVE, une campagne régionale de dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus. Organisation, résultats à 7 ans et perspectives. Presse Med 32: 1545–51

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Mubiayi N, Bogaert E, Boman F et al. (2002) Histoire du suivi cytologique de 148 femmes atteintes d’un cancer invasif du col utérin. Gynécol Obstet Fertil 30: 210–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Centre international de recherche sur le cancer (mai 2004) Le CIRC confirme que le dépistage du cancer du col chez les femmes entre 25 et 65 ans réduit la mortalité liée à ce cancer. Communiqué de Presse no 151

    Google Scholar 

  8. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R et al. (2002) The 2001 Bethesda System. Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 287: 2114–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé (1998) Conduite à tenir diagnostique devant un frottis anormal du col de l’utérus. Paris (site: www.anaes.fr)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé (2002) Recommandations pour la pratique clinique. Conduite à tenir diagnostique devant un frottis anormal du col de l’utérus. Paris (site: www.anaes.fr)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Martin-Hirsch P, Lilford R, Jarvis G et al. (1999) Efficacy of cervical-smear collection devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 354: 1763–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bergeron C, Cartier I, Guldner L et al. (2004) Lésions pré-cancéreuses et cancers du col de l’utérus en Île-de-France diagnostiqués par le frottis cervical — Étude du Centre de regroupement informatique et statistique de données d’anatomocyto-pathologie en Île-de-France (CRISAPIF). BEH 2005, 2: 5–6

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jones BA, Novis DA (2000) Follow up of abnormal gynaecologic cytology: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 16,132 cases from 306 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124: 665–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Herbert A, Schmitt F (2004) Guidelines for Laboratories Providing Cervical Cytology Screening. International Academy of Cytology (IAC). Guidelines for Laboratories Guidelines Committee

    Google Scholar 

  15. Renshaw AA (2003) Rescreening in cervical cytology for quality control. When bad data is worse than no data or what works, what doesn’t, and why? Clin Lab Med 23: 695–708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Koss LG (1993) Cervical Pap smear. New directions. Cancer 71: 1406–12

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cochand-Priollet B, Vacher-Lavenu MC (1999) French gynecologic cytology. Clin Lab Med 19: 877–84

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Barres D, Bergeron C (2000) Reproductibilité du diagnostic cytologique: étude du CRISAP Île-de-France. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 28: 120–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bergeron C, Fagnani F (2003) Performance of a new, liquid-based cervical screening technique in the clinical setting of a large French laboratory. Acta Cytol 47: 753–61

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Weynand B, Berlière M, Haumont E et al. (2003) A new, liquid-based cytology technique. Acta Cytol 47: 149–53

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2003) Guidance on the use of liquid-based cytology for cervical screening. http://www.nice.org.uk

    Google Scholar 

  22. Scottish Cervical Screening Programme: steering group report on the feasibility of introducing liquid-based cytology (2002) http://www.show.scot.nhs.uk

    Google Scholar 

  23. Moss SM, Gray A, Legood R et al. (2003) Evaluation of HPV/LBC cervical screening pilot studies. First report to the Department of Health on the evaluation of LBC. http:// www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/lbc-pilot-evaluaion.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bernstein SJ, Sachez-Ramos L, Ndubisi B (2001) Liquid-based cervical smear study and conventional Papanicolaou smears: a meta-analysis of prospective studies comparing cytologic diagnosis and sample adequacy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185: 308–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Coste J, Cochand-Priollet B, de Cremoux P et al. (2003) Cross sectional study of conventional cervical smear, monolayer cytology, and human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening. BMJ 326: 733–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hartmann KE, Nanda K, Hall S et al. (2001) Technological advances for evaluation of cervical cytology: is newer better? Obstet Gynecol Surv 56: 765–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Moselet RP, Paget S (2002) Liquid-based cytology: is this the way forward for cervical screening? Cytopathology 13: 71–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Arbyn M, Buntinx F, van Ranst M et al. (2004) Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal pap smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 96: 280–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arrêté du 19 mars 2004 modifiant l’arrêté du 3 avril 1985 fixant la nomenclature des actes de biologie médicale. Journal Officiel du 30 mars 2004

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS et al. for the 2001 ASCCP-sponsored Consensus Conference (2002) 2001 Consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytological abnormalities. JAMA 287: 2120–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Agence nationale d’accréditation et d’évaluation en santé (2004) Évaluation de l’intérêt de la recherche des papillomavirus humains (PVH) dans le dépistage des lésions précancéreuses et cancéreuses du col de l’utérus (site: www.anaes.fr)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kitchener H, Wheeler CM, Desai M et al. (2004) The artistic trial. A randomized trial in screening to improve cytology (abstract). In: 21st International Papillomavirus Conference, Mexico

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mayrand MH, Duarte-Franco E, Coutlé EF et al. (2004) HPV testing versus PAP cytology in screening cervical cancer precursors; design and baseline patient characteristics of the Canadian cervical cancer screening (CCCAST) (abstract). In: 21st International Papillomavirus Conference, Mexico, p. 139

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ronco G, Segnan N, De Marco L et al. (2004) A randomised trial on HPV testing for primary screening of cervical cancer: preliminary results. In: 21st International Papillomavirus Conference, Mexico, p. 258

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Lorincz A et al. (1997) Cervical specimens collected in liquid buffer are suitable for both cytologic screening and ancillary human papillomavirus testing. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 81: 89–97

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Nonogaki S, Wakamatsu A, Filho AL et al. (2004). Hybrid Capture II and polymerase chain reaction for identifying HPV infections in samples collected in a new collection medium. Acta Cytol 48: 514–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Bergeron C, Vacher-Lavenu MC (2003) Dépistage du cancer du col: systèmes de santé et stratégies en Europe. In: Elsevier (ed). Cytopathologie gynécologique en milieu liquide. Cochand-Priollet B et Fabre M. Paris, p 100–7

    Google Scholar 

  38. Merea E, Le Gales C, Cochand-Priollet B et al. (2002) Cost of screening for cancerous and pre-cancerous lesions of the cervix. Diagn Cytopathol 27(4): 251–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ (2002) Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA 287: 2382–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sherlaw-Johnson C, Philips Z (2004) An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programme. Br J Cancer 91: 84–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D et al. (2002) American cancer society guidelines for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. Cancer J Clin 52: 342–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. HPV testing and liquid-based techniques for cervical cancer screening (2003) Ottawa: Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment; www.cchta.ca

    Google Scholar 

  43. Medical Services Advisory Committee (2002) Liquid based cytology for cervical screening. MSAC Reference 12a, Assessment report, Canberra. www.msac.gov.au

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hoeland B (2003) Implementation of liquid-based cytology in the cervical screening programme against cervical cancer in the county of Funene, Denmark, and status for the first year. Cytopathology 14: 269–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Plan cancer 2003–2007. www.plancancer.fr

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire Pasteur Cerba, 95066, Cergy-Pontoise Cedex 9

    C. Bergeron

Authors
  1. C. Bergeron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag France

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bergeron, C. (2005). Frottis conventionnel ou milieu liquide?. In: Le dépistage du cancer du col de l’utérus. Dépistage et cancer. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/2-287-28699-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/2-287-28699-3_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Paris

  • Print ISBN: 978-2-287-22083-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-2-287-28699-5

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation