Objective
To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the classic Meisels cytologic criteria and the Schneider secondary criteria relative to the hybrid capture method for diagnosing HPV infection.
Methods
This was a retrospective study performed at a public university hospital. A total of 41 patients with a cytologic diagnosis of HPV infection and 40 HPV-negative patients were selected for review of the cervical-vaginal smears seeking to classical and secondary criteria. A single pathologist reviewed the slides in search of the criteria. The classical and secondary cytologic criteria were compared with the hybrid capture for diagnosing HPV infection. Bartleti test was applied for the age analysis, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportions. The tests were considered significant when the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis was less than 5% (p < 0.05).
Results
The Meisels criteria were less sensitive (34.0%) than the secondary Schneider criteria (57.5%) when compared with the hybrid capture (p < 0.0001), although the specificity of the former criteria was non-significantly higher (91.2% and 67.7%, respectively). In cases of moderate or intense inflammation, the sensitivity and specificity of the Schneider criteria were decreased, 33.3% and 50.0% respectively (p = 0.0115).
Conclusions
Compared with hybrid capture for diagnosis of HPV infection, the sensitivity of the secondary Schneider criteria was higher than the classical Meisels criteria.Moderate or intense inflammation reduces the sensitivity and specificity of the secondary Schneider criteria for diagnosing HPV infection using the hybrid capture as the gold standard.
HPV; cervical neoplasia; vaginal smears; papillomavirus; DNA