| Ⅰt is known that persistent infection of high-risk human papillomavirus isthe clear cause of precancerous cervical lesions and cervical carcinoma. Theoccurrence and development of cervical cancer is a long process of gradualtransformation to mutation during about10-15years[2]. Therefore, screening isthe primary means of prevention and control of cervical cancer. Ⅰnternationalexperimental data can prove that screening can reduce the incidence andmortality of invasive cervical cancer[3]. So how to choose the method ofcervical cancer screening, has become the focus of research around the world inrecent years.Objective: By observation of the TCT, HC2and colposcopy to cervicalcarcinoma and precancerous lesions to evaluate clinical value in this thesis.Methods: We colleced276patients from March2011to March2012ingynecological clinic of the First Clinical Hospital of Jilin University who hadTCT, HC2, colposcopy and colposcopic biopsy. The gold standard of diagnosisis pathology. We evaluate the value of the screening methods to cervical cancerand precancerous lesions.Results: Ⅰn276patients, with pathologically positive (standard cervicalmild dysplasia and more severe lesions) for the134cases detected97cases ofTCT, the sensitivity of72.39%; HC2is detected in116cases, the sensitivity of86.57%; colposcopy107cases, the sensitivity of79.85%. The sensitivity ofHC2and TCT compared to the highly significant difference (χ2=8.26, P<0.01); compared to the sensitivity of HC2is with colposcopy withoutsignificant difference (χ2=2.16, P>0.05). Joint detection of three methods of129cases, compared with TCT alone a very significant difference (χ2=28.91,P <0.01), compared with HC2alone a very significant difference (χ2=8.04, P <0.01), compared with colposcopy alone was a significant difference (χ~2=17.18, P <0.01).Pathologically positive in cervical cancer of24cases of CⅠN Ⅱ-Ⅲ,64cases of CⅠN Ⅰ,46cases of TCT detected in24cases of cervical cancer21cases,the sensitivity of87.50%; HC2is detected in24cases, the sensitivity of100%;colposcopy detected23cases, the sensitivity of95.83%; three joint screeningdetected24cases, the sensitivity100percent. TCT detection of CⅠN Ⅱ-Ⅲ64cases, in48cases, the sensitivity of75.00%; HC2is detected in56cases, thesensitivity of87.50%; colposcopy detected54cases, the sensitivity of84.38%;three joint screening detected63cases, sensitive degree of98.44%. TCTdetection of CⅠN Ⅰ46cases of28cases, the sensitivity of60.87%; HC2isdetected in36cases, the sensitivity of78.26%; colposcopy detected30cases,the sensitivity of65.22%; three joint screening detected42cases, the sensitivityof91.30%. From the individual screening detection rate of cervical disease,HC2detection of cervical cancer, CⅠN Ⅱ-Ⅲ, CⅠN Ⅰ detection rate wassignificantly better than colposcopy and TCT detection, but among them wasstatistically significant (χ~2=3.71, P>0.05). Joint Ⅰnspection of the threecervical and the other three check no statistically significant difference (χ~2=6.26, P>0.05); CⅠN Ⅱ-Ⅲ of the Joint Ⅰnspection of the three were statisticallysignificant compared with the other three checks (χ~2=15.19, P <0.01);compared to CⅠN Ⅰ in the Joint Ⅰnspection of the three and the other threechecks were statistically significant (χ~2=13.53, P <0.01).Conclusion: cervical cancer in the HC2test positive rate was100%. theof TCT, HC2is detected, colposcopy, cervical disease screening in the clinicaluse of their own strengths, combined application of mutually complementarycan significantly improve the positive rate of cervical disease, reduce the rate ofmisdiagnosis is cervical disease screening the best way to check of HPV DNAload and the increase in the extent of cervical disease, possibly as an effective indicator to determine the progress of cervical disease severity and predictionof cervical lesions. |
PDF Full Text Request