Premium
The use of the ‘borderline’ category in the reporting of cervical cytopathology in the UK: results of a survey conducted under the aegis of the British Society for Clinical Cytology
Author(s) -
Duvall E.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
cytopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.512
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1365-2303
pISSN - 0956-5507
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2007.00548.x
Subject(s) - medicine , cytopathology , gynecology , obstetrics , cervical screening , cytology , pathology , cervical cancer , cancer
Objective: To determine how the ‘borderline’ category was used by cytopathologists in the UK when reporting cervical smears. Methods: A questionnaire was sent by email to members of the British Society for Clinical Cytology. Results: There is wide variation in the use of the ‘borderline’ category in the UK but the majority of respondents (77.6%) used it when reporting smears that were either on the borderline between negative and low grade squamous dyskaryosis (‘borderline ?low grade’), or on the borderline between negative and high grade squamous dyskaryosis (‘borderline ?high grade’), or on the borderline between negative and glandular dyskaryosis ‘borderline ?glandular dyskaryosis’). A significant minority (15.7%), however, did not use ‘borderline’ when reporting smears that showed an abnormality that was possibly high grade squamous dyskaryosis. A majority (79.1%) of respondents thought that it would be useful to have separate reporting categories for ‘borderline ?low grade’ and ‘borderline ?high grade’. Conclusions: There is diversity in the use of the category ‘borderline’ in the UK. The proposed revised BSCC terminology with separate categories for borderline ?low grade, borderline ?high grades and borderline ? glandular dyskaryosis reflects the opinion of the majority of respondents to the questionnaire.