A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of Cytobrush and cervicovaginal lavage sampling methods for the detection of genital human papillomavirus. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The detection and typing of genital human papillomavirus (HPV) is critical due to its link to cervical cancer.
  • A study compared two noninvasive methods for collecting cervical cells: cervicovaginal lavage and scrape-Cytobrush, involving 74 patients.
  • Results showed that cervicovaginal lavage was the most sensitive method for detecting HPV, as it resulted in more positive diagnoses compared to the scrape-Cytobrush method.

Article Abstract

The development of an accurate method for the detection and typing of genital human papillomavirus is of substantial clinical importance. This virus has been implicated as an etiologic agent in the development of cervical neoplasia. To detect human papillomavirus infection with maximum sensitivity, cells must be collected and assayed for human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid. We compared two noninvasive methods of sampling exfoliated cervical cells--cervicovaginal lavage and scrape-Cytobrush. Seventy-four patients newly referred to the colposcopy clinic were divided randomly for cell sampling by either cervicovaginal lavage followed by scrape-Cytobrush or, conversely, scrape-Cytobrush followed by cervicovaginal lavage. Restriction analysis and Southern blot hybridization were used to test all the samples thus obtained for human papillomavirus. Overall, test results from 42 patients (56.8%) were positive for human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid. Twenty-six (31.1%) tested positive for human papillomavirus by both sampling methods, and 32 (43.2%) tested negative for human papillomavirus by both methods. One (1.4%) tested positive with scrape-Cytobrush sampling but negative with cervicovaginal lavage, while 15 (20.3%) tested negative with scrape-Cytobrush but positive with cervicovaginal lavage (p less than 0.001, McNemar's test). These data, combined with previous work from our group, suggest that, of the available methods, cervicovaginal lavage, coupled with human papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic acid hybridization, is the most sensitive noninvasive method for harvesting cells for molecular identification of human papillomavirus in the female lower genital tract.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(89)90947-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

human papillomavirus
40
cervicovaginal lavage
24
papillomavirus deoxyribonucleic
12
deoxyribonucleic acid
12
human
10
papillomavirus
10
sampling methods
8
genital human
8
lavage scrape-cytobrush
8
positive human
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!