The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology

Sun, 30 Dec 2018 10:47:00 GMT bethesda system for reporting cervical pdf This book offers clear, up-to-date guidance on how to report cytologic findings in cervical, vaginal and anal samples in accordance with the 2014 Bethesda System Update. Sun, 30 Dec 2018 08:23:00 GMT The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology ... May 2015—The value of standardized terminology for reporting cytology and histopathologyhas been essential in our work and important for patient care. The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, put forward in 1988 thanks to the pioneering work of Diane Solomon, MD, and Robert Kurman, MD,1 saw unprecedented adoption around the world. Wed, 26 Dec 2018 19:05:00 GMT Cytopathology and More | Inside the 2014 Bethesda System ... The Bethesda system (TBS) is a system for reporting cervical or vaginal cytologic diagnoses, used for reporting Pap smear results. It was introduced in 1988 and revised in 1991 , 2001, and 2014. The name comes from the location (Bethesda, Maryland) of the conference that established the system.Additionally, the Bethesda system is used for cytopathology of thyroid nodules Tue, 01 Jan 2019 06:48:00 GMT Bethesda system Wikipedia CONSENSUS STATEMENT The 2001 Bethesda System Terminology for Reporting Results of Cervical Cytology Diane Solomon, MD Diane Davey, MD Robert Kurman, MD Tue, 01 Jan 2019 13:36:00 GMT The 2001 Bethesda System: Terminology for Reporting ... The Cancer. The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology. Cancer. Thyroid. Thu, 27 Dec 2018 18:28:00 GMT The Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology System Bethesda (ang. The Bethesda System, TBS) – klasyfikacja obrazÃ3w cytologicznych uzyskanych rozmazÃ3w z pochwowej czÄTMÅ›ci szyjki macicy. KlasyfikacjÄTM zaproponowano w 1988 roku, nastÄTMpnie modyfikowano w 1991 i 2001 roku.. W klasyfikacji Bethesda obraz cytologiczny klasyfikuje siÄTM jako: Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:54:00 GMT System Bethesda – Wikipedia, wolna encyklopedia HKCOG GUIDELINES NUMBER 3 (revised November 2016) 4 the Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology. This has proven to be more reproducible and divides patients into two managerial subgroups [17-19]. Tue, 01 Jan 2019 18:01:00 GMT HKCOG Guidelines Number 4 Revised November 2016 Historically, abnormal changes of cervical epithelial cells were described as mild, moderate, or severe dysplasia. In 1988 the National Cancer Institute developed "The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Cytologic Diagnoses." Sat, 29 Dec 2018 21:18:00 GMT Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Wikipedia Coding for Path and Lab Screenings • 88141-88158 • Cervical or vaginal • Differ by screening method(s) used. • Methods – Thin layer – Slides Sun, 30 Dec 2018 01:21:00 GMT Coding for Obstetrics and Gynecology AAPC Bats and Rabies What you need to know about bats and rabies to keep you and your family safe. Annual Water Testing Test your well water once a year for bacteria and nitrates, and every 5 years for arsenic, fluoride, uranium, radon, lead, and manganese. Tickborne Diseases Learn the facts about tickborne diseases and the steps you can take to prevent them. Tue, 24 Dec 2013 23:58:00 GMT Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention: DHHS Maine Role of NYS Primary Care Providers. For patients with HIV infection, primary care clinicians, including mid-level care providers, have a major role in the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of gynecologic comorbidities and especially cervical dysplasia and cervical

[1]  B. Jones,et al.  Quality management in gynecologic cytology using interlaboratory comparison. , 2009, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[2]  Mark Schiffman,et al.  ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study , 2000, Acta Cytologica.

[3]  D. Wilbur,et al.  Bethesda 2001 implementation and reporting rates: 2003 practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. , 2009, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[4]  Thomas C Wright,et al.  2001 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women with Cervical Cytological Abnormalities. , 2002, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[5]  S. Selvaggi.  Cytologic features of squamous cell carcinoma in situ involving endocervical glands in endocervical cytobrush specimens. , 1994, Acta cytologica.

[6]  C. Key,et al.  The rising incidence of adenocarcinoma relative to squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix in the United States--a 24-year population-based study. , 2000, Gynecologic oncology.

[7]  David R. Scott,et al.  Toward objective quality assurance in cervical cytopathology. Correlation of cytopathologic diagnoses with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus types. , 1994, American journal of clinical pathology.

[8]  Ponder Tb,et al.  Glandular Cells in Vaginal Smears from Posthysterectomy Patients , 1997 .

[9]  J. Habbema,et al.  Endocervical status is not predictive of the incidence of cervical cancer in the years after negative smears. , 2001, American journal of clinical pathology.

[10]  G. Birdsong.  Pap smear adequacy: Is our understanding satisfactory… or limited? , 2001, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[11]  A. Renshaw,et al.  Detection of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix in Papanicolaou tests: comparison of diagnostic accuracy with other high-grade lesions. , 2004, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[12]  M. Schiffman,et al.  Adding a test for human papillomavirus DNA to cervical-cancer screening. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  I. Eltoum,et al.  Women With Atypical Glandular Cells , 2004 .

[14]  P. Thomas,et al.  The Anal Pap Smear: Cytomorphology of squamous intraepithelial lesions , 2005, CytoJournal.

[15]  Longitudinal study of women with negative cervical smears according to endocervical status , 1991, The Lancet.

[16]  A. Praestgaard,et al.  Interobserver variability in subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions: Results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. , 1999, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[17]  A. Moscicki,et al.  American Cancer Society Guideline for the Early Detection of Cervical Neoplasia and Cancer , 2002, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[18]  R Reid,et al.  Human papillomavirus infection of the cervix: relative risk associations of 15 common anogenital types. , 1992, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[19]  A. Renshaw,et al.  Altered recognition of reparative changes in ThinPrep specimens in the College of American Pathologists Gynecologic Cytology Program. , 2005, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[20]  J. T. Cox,et al.  Prospective follow-up suggests similar risk of subsequent cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3 among women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or negative colposcopy and directed biopsy. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  M. Schiffman,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. , 2001, JAMA.

[22]  R. Ashfaq,et al.  ThinPrep Pap Test , 1999, Acta Cytologica.

[23]  C. Sung,et al.  ASC:SIL ratio following implementation of the 2001 Bethesda system , 2004, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[24]  A. Rader,et al.  Impact of the new Bethesda System 2001 on specimen adequacy of conventional cervicovaginal smears , 2004, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[25]  Mark H Stoler,et al.  New Bethesda terminology and evidence-based management guidelines for cervical cytology findings. , 2002, JAMA.

[26]  C. Bewtra.  Columnar cells in posthysterectomy vaginal smears , 1992, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[27]  T. Colgan,et al.  Reparative changes and the false-positive/false-negative Papanicolaou test: a study from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology . , 2009, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[28]  David R. Scott,et al.  The elevated 10-year risk of cervical precancer and cancer in women with human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 or 18 and the possible utility of type-specific HPV testing in clinical practice. , 2005, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[29]  Mark Sherman,et al.  The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. , 2002, JAMA.

[30]  Improving accuracy in gynecologic cytology. Results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytology. , 1993, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[31]  P. Piraino,et al.  Biopsy findings in five hundred thirty-one patients with atypical glandular cells of uncertain significance as defined by the Bethesda system. , 1997, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[32]  F. X. Bosch,et al.  Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  Brown Cl,et al.  The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. , 1990, Acta cytologica.

[34]  W. Frable,et al.  Tubal metaplasia. A frequent potential pitfall in the cytologic diagnosis of endocervical glandular dysplasia on cervical smears. , 1992, Acta cytologica.

[35]  E. Cibas,et al.  The clinical significance of benign-appearing endometrial cells on a Papanicolaou test in women 40 years or older. , 2005, American journal of clinical pathology.

[36]  Sophie K. Thompson,et al.  Atypical Glandular Cells of Undetermined Significance on Cervical Smears , 1999, Acta Cytologica.

[37]  M. Mauney,et al.  Rates of condyloma and dysplasia in papanicolaou smears with and without endocervical cells , 1990, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[38]  D. Davey,et al.  Specimen adequacy evaluation in gynecologic cytopathology: Current laboratory practice in the college of american pathologists interlaboratory comparison program and tentative guidelines for future practice , 1993, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[39]  Prabodh K. Gupta,et al.  Endometrial cells of the “Lower uterine segment” (LUS) in cervical smears obtained by endocervical brushings: A source of potential diagnostic pitfall , 1995, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[40]  H. Mitchell.  Longitudinal analysis of histologic high‐grade disease after negative cervical cytology according to endocervical status , 2001, Cancer.

[41]  R. Burk,et al.  Natural history of cervicovaginal papillomavirus infection in young women , 1998 .

[42]  D. Davey,et al.  Clinicopathologic correlation of the unsatisfactory papanicolaou smear , 1997, Cancer.

[43]  H. Mitchell,et al.  Influence of endocervical status on the cytologic prediction of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 1992, Acta cytologica.

[44]  B. Jones,et al.  Follow-up of abnormal gynecologic cytology: a college of American pathologists Q-probes study of 16132 cases from 306 laboratories. , 2000, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[45]  A. E. Raffle,et al.  Detection rates for abnormal cervical smears: what are we screening for? , 1995, The Lancet.

[46]  M. Henry,et al.  Effect of Cellularity on the Sensitivity of Detecting Squamous Lesions in Liquid-Based Cervical Cytology , 2003, Acta Cytologica.

[47]  M. Sherman,et al.  Qualification of ASCUS. A comparison of equivocal LSIL and equivocal HSIL cervical cytology in the ASCUS LSIL Triage Study. , 2001, American journal of clinical pathology.

[48]  R. Reiter,et al.  Problems Encountered With the Bethesda System: The University of Iowa Experience , 1991, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[49]  P. Vooijs,et al.  The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes. , 1983, Acta cytologica.

[50]  I. Eltoum,et al.  Women with atypical glandular cells: a long-term follow-up study in a high-risk population. , 2004, American journal of clinical pathology.

[51]  K. Lee.  Atypical glandular cells in cervical smears from women who have undergone cone biopsy. A potential diagnostic pitfall. , 1993, Acta cytologica.

[52]  P. Boyle,et al.  The continuing increase in adenocarcinoma of the uterine cervix: a birth cohort phenomenon. , 1996, International journal of epidemiology.

[53]  A. Renshaw,et al.  Cytologic features of squamous cell carcinoma in conventional smears: comparison of cases that performed poorly with those that performed well in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in cervicovaginal cytology. , 2005, Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.

[54]  D. Wilbur,et al.  Reactive change and atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in papanicolaou smears: A cytohistologic correlation , 1993, Diagnostic cytopathology.

[55]  Diane Solomon,et al.  The Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses: revised after the second National Cancer Institute Workshop, April 29-30, 1991. , 1993, Acta cytologica.

[56]  B. Ronnett,et al.  Atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high‐grade squamous intraepithelial lesion , 2005, Cancer.

[57]  I. Ramzy,et al.  Increased Detection of Epithelial Cell Abnormalities by Liquid-Based Gynecologic Cytology Preparations , 1998, Acta Cytologica.

[58]  Diane Solomon,et al.  The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical/Vaginal Cytologic Diagnoses , 1994, Springer US.

[59]  J. T. Cox,et al.  ASCCP Patient Management Guidelines: Pap Test Specimen Adequacy and Quality Indicators , 2002, Journal of lower genital tract disease.