The autotome of cervico-vaginal sample and the taking made by the gynecologist in the diagnosis of cervical cancer. Applicability in cervical cancer screening programs

Main Article Content

Gilberto Antonio Bastidas Pacheco
Roman Lisandro Iglesias, MSc
Roman Lisandro Iglesias, MSc
Amilcar Josue Pérez
Elci Josefina Villegas

Keywords

Cytology, cervical cancer, autotome, research.

Abstract

Background: Worldwide cervical cancer is the second among women. In high-risk countries, cervical cancer affects a substantial number of women of reproductive age and occupationally active women who have limited access to screening or early diagnosis for economic reasons or because of cultural barriers.


Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional and field study based on the cervical sample taken by the woman herself and the health professional, for further investigation of cervical cancer.


Results: In more than 98% of the samples by self-diagnosis, there was a diagnostic agreement with those obtained by the health professionals.


Conclusion: There is a high diagnostic correspondence between the sample taken by the woman herself and the health professional, that the educational level of the females does not influence the decision to perform the self-test, nor in their ability to learn the test, and that this study is the first of its kind in Venezuela.

Abstract 77 | PDF Downloads 0 HTML Downloads 0 XML Downloads 0

References

Agurto I, Sandoval J, De la Rosa M, Guardado M. Improving cervical cancer prevention
in a developing country. Int J Qual Health Care. 2006; 18(2):81-86.

Aparicio A, Morera M. Evaluación del programa de detección temprana y atención oportuna
del cáncer cervicouterino. Aten Primaria. 2009; 41:300-307. DOI 10.1016/j.aprim.2008.10.018

Bhatla N, Dar L, Patro AR, Kumar P, Kriplani A, Gulati A, et al. Can human papillomavirus DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples compare with physiciancollected cervical samples and cytology for cervical cancer screening in developing countries? Cancer Epidemiol. 2009; 33:446-450. DOI 10.1016/j.canep.2009.10.013

Brown C, Leon M, Muñoz K, Fagioni A, Amador L, Frain B, et al. Human papillomavirus infection and its association with cervical dysplasia in Ecuadorian women attending a private cancer screening clinic. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2009; 42: 629-636. PubMed

Caetano R, Vianna C, Thuler L, Girianelli V. Custo-efetividade no diagnóstico precoce do
câncer de colo uterino no Brasil. Physis. 2006; 16:99-118. DOI 10.1590/S0103-
73312006000100007

Capote L. Aspectos epidemiológicos del cáncer en Venezuela. Rev Venez Oncol. 2006;
18(4):269-281.

Catarino R, Vassilakos P, Bilancioni A, Vanden Eynde M, Meyer-Hamme U, Menoud PA, Guerry F, Petignat Randomized Comparison of Two Vaginal Self-Sampling Methods for Human Papillomavirus Detection: Dry Swab versus FTA Cartridge. PLoS One. 2015; 10(12):e0143644.

Chan P, Sung H, Sawaya Y. Changes in cervical cancer incidence after three decades of screening US women less than 3o years old. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102(4):765-773. PubMed

Dareng E, Jedy-Agba E, Bamisaye P, Isa Modibbo F, Oyeneyin L, Adewole A, et al. Influence of spirituality and modesty on acceptance of self-sampling for Cervical cancer screening. PLoS One. 2015; 10(11):e0141679. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0141679

Enerly E, Bonde J, Schee K, Pedersen H, Lönnberg S, Nygård M. Self-Sampling for Human Papillomavirus Testing among Non-Attenders Increases Attendance to the Norwegian Cervical Cancer Screening Programme. PLoS One. 2016; 11(4):e0151978. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151978

Escandón C, Benítez M, Navarrete J. Epidemiología del cáncer cervicouterino en el
instituto mexicano del seguro social. Sal Pub Mex. 1992; 34(6):607-614.

Flisser A, García-Malo F, Canepa M, Doncel S, Espinosa R, Moreno R, et al.
Implementation and evaluation of a national external quality control program for cervical
cytology in Mexico. Sal Pub Méx. 2002; 44:431-436 PubMed

Flores Y, Bishai D, Lazcano E, Shah K, Lörincz A, Hernández M, et al. Improving
cervical cancer screening in Mexico: results from the Morelos VPH study. Sal Pub Méx.
2003; 45(suppl. 3):S388-398. PubMed

García-Sierra N, Martro E, Castellá E, Llatljo’s M, Tarrats A, Bascuñana E, et al.
Evaluation of array-based method for human papillomavirus detection and genotyping in
comparison with conventional methods used in cervical cancer screening. J Clin Microbiol.
2009; 47 (7):2165-2169. DOI 10.1128/JCM.00402-09

Giraudo N, Discacciati V, Bakalar K, Basualdo N, Dreyer C. Barreras para el rastreo de
cáncer de cuello uterino en la ciudad de Buenos Aires. Archivos de Medicina Familiar y
General. 2006; 3:7-21.

Guerra M, García M, Garaban C, González J, Damelis Daza D, García D. Características epidemiológicas de la mortalidad por cáncer de cuello uterino en el estado Lara, durante el periodo 2000-2010. Rev Vzlana Sal Pub. 2013; 1(1):15-21.

Gutiérrez-Delgado C, Báez-Mendoza C, González-Pier E, Prieto A, Witlen R. Relación costo efectividad de las intervenciones preventivas contra el cáncer cervical en mujeres mexicanas. Sal Pub Méx. 2008; 50:107-118.

Guzmán S, Salas P, Puente R, Hott H, Israel E, Guzmán R Pesquisa y control del
cáncer cervicouterino en el Servicio de Salud de Valdivia (1993-2003). Rev Med Chile. 2005; 133:685-692. DOI 10.4067/S0034-98872005000600011

Jain N, Irwin K, Montano D, Kasprzyk D, Carlin L, Freeman C, et al. Family physicians’ knowledge of genital human papillomavirus (VPH) infection and VPH-related conditions, United States. Fam Med. 2006; 38(7):483-489.

Karjalainen L, Anttila A, Nieminen P, Luostarinen T, Virtanen A. Self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: comparison of a brush-based and a lavage-based cervicovaginal self-sampling device. BMC Cancer. 2016; 16(1):221. DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2246-9

Lazcano-Ponce E, Buiatti E, Nájera-Aguilar P, de Ruiz P, Hernández M. Evaluation model of the Mexican national program for early cervical cancer detection and proposals for a new approach. J Cancer Causes Control. 1998; 9:241-251. PubMed

Narváez L, Loayza F, Narváez M, Vega X, Vargas P, Sáenz K. Detección de virus del
papiloma humano en muestras de hisopados vaginales por autotoma. Rev Latinoam Patol Clin Med Lab. 2015; 62 (1):5-10.

Novoa A. Cáncer del cérvix uterino. Revisión epidemiológica en Latinoamérica. La Salud en
Durango 2001; 2: 21-27. PubMed

O´Brien K, Cokkinides V, Jemal A, Cardinez C, Murray T, Samuels A, Ward E, Thun M. Cancer statistics for Hispanics, 2003. Cancer J Clin. 2003; 53(4):208-226.

Parkhurst J & Vulimiri M. Cervical cancer and the global health agenda: Insights from multiple policy-analysis frameworks. Glob Public Health. 2013; 8:1093-1108. DOI 10.1080/17441692.2013.850524

Parkin M, Pisani P, Ferlay J. Estimates of the worldwide frequency of sixteen major cancers
in 1990. Int J Cancer. 1993; 54:594-606. PubMed

Peñaranda E, Molokwu J, Flores S, Byrd T, Brown L, Shokar N. Women's Attitudes Toward Cervicovaginal Self-Sampling for High-Risk HPV Infection on the USMexico Border. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2015; 19(4):323-328. DOI 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000134

Pisani P, Darkin D, Bray F, Ferlay J. Estimates of the Worldwide mortality from 25 cancers. 1990. Int J Cancer. 1999; 83(1):18-29.

Rodríguez M, Lunar T, Lara-Martínez G, López E, Gómez Y. Calidad en la toma de muestra para la detección oportuna de cáncer cervicouterino. Rev Mex Patol Clin. 2006; 53:229-234.

Rozemeijer K, de Kok I, Naber S, van Kemenade F, Penning C, van Rosmalen J, et al. When is it effective to offer self-sampling to non-attendees-response. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015; 24(8):1296. DOI 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0523

Tejada-Tayabas Luz, Hernández-Ibarra L, Pastor-Durango M. Fortalezas y debilidades
del programa para la detección y el control del cáncer cervicouterino. Evaluación cualitativa
en San Luis Potosí, México. Gac Sanit. 2012; 26(4):311-316. DOI 10.1016/j.gaceta.2011.09.023