Cervical Screening
Telecervico vs Cervicography
Clinical Reports
Tests features  
Clinical Reports

Development and Validation of Novel Digitalized Cervicography system

Reference: Obstetrics & Gynecology Science 2016

A study by Soo-Nyung kim et al (2016) included 100 patients to compare telemedicine-based cervico-
graphy (Digital cervicography system;DCS) with conventional film cervicography in the present study.
In order to validate the consensus rate of the telecervicography and conventional film cervicography,
three methods; analogue image, digitalized by scanning analogue image and digitalized image were
evaluated by specialists. Total 567 images were analyzed to assess intraobserver consensus and
91.9% (digital & analogue), 86.2% (analogue & scanned images), 86.1% (digital & scanned images)
of diagnosis were identical with kappa value 0.83, 0.72, 0.71 respectively; reflecting “almost perfect
agreement” and “substantial agreement”. Thus, the conclusion is that there is very good intraobsever
consensus between conventional film cervicography and digital cervicography. This study is highly
significant in that it is the very first study to validate the quality of digital cervicography with that of conventional cervicography

The Performance of Telecervicography for Detection of
Pre-invasive and Invasive Disease of the Uterine Cervix
as an Adjunctive Test to Pap Smears

Reference: Contemporary Oncology 2016

This paper was published in Contemporary Oncology in 2016 and 863 females have undergone tele-
cervigram and 252 with positive results were included in the study. It compares two cervical cancer
screening method, Pap smears and Telecervicography solely and combined at the same time.
As Tele-cervicography and Pap smear are done solely, the sensitivity finds out to be 94% and 60.7%
each. The combination of telecervico and Pap smear for the detection of HSILs or cancer resulted in
an increase in sensitivity from 84.6% (Pap only: ASC-US or more severe) to 98.3% (Pap plus Tele-
cervicography over P0 or more severe). In conclusion, Telecervicography is considered as a useful
complementary tool to cytology for the accurate result.

Comparison of Single-, double-, and triple-combined testing,
including Pap test, HPV DNA test and cervicography,
as screening methods for the detection of uterine cervical cancer

Reference : Oncology Report 2013

This paper was published in oncology report in 2013. The study included 261 patients screened
for uterine cervical cancer. All women simultaneously underwent cervical cytology, HPV DNA test
and cervicography for uterine cervical cancer screening and colposcopically directed biopsy for
diagnostic evaluation. The triple-combined testing was consistently the most sensitive among the
cervical screening tests. It compares three cervical cancer screening methods when implemented
solely; cytology 87.5%, HPV DNA test 72.7%, and cervicography 94.3% respectively. Cervicography
has been concluded as the highest sensitivity screening test as a sole test. Combining all three
methods would improve the sensitivity up to 100% which infer to extremely high accuracy in
detection of cervical lesions.

The comparative evaluation of clinical screening in combined tests
[cytology(ThinPrep), HPV DNA test(Hybrid capture Ⅱ), cervicography]
for uterine cervical cancer

Reference : 2006 FIGO Report

A study by SJ Han et al (2006) included 252 patients who were underwent the biopsy among 829 patients who had cervical cancer screening from Dec. 2001 to Sep. 2005. These 252 patients simultaneously underwent triple combined test [cervical cytology(ThinPrep®), HPV DNA test (Hybrid capture Ⅱ®, Cervicography®(DCS®) and colposcopically-directed biopsy on operation for diagnostic evaluation. The results shown in Table 2 confirmed that the triple combined test [cervical cytology (ThinPrep®) + Cervicography®(DCS®) + HPV DNA test(Hybrid capture Ⅱ ®)] showed a sensitivity of 96.0%, while double combined test [cervical cytology(ThinPrep®)+ Cervicography®(DCS®)] showed a sensitivity of 89.0%, the other double combined test [cervical cytology(ThinPrep®)+ HPV DNA test (Hybrid capture®)] showed a sensitivity of 86.7%. Cervicography®(DCS®) showed a specificity of 75.4% (highest among the single test), positive predictability of 89.8% (also highest). The conclusion was that the sensitivity of cervical cytology was markedly improved by combination with the Cervicography® (DCS®) and HPV DNA test.

Table 2. Comparison of ThinPrep® , HPV DNA test, Cervicography®(DCS®), ThinPrep® + HPV DNA test, ThinPrep® + Cervicography®(DCS®), ThinPrep® + HPV DNA test + Cervicography®(DCS®)
(n = 252 patients) Sensitivity Specificity Positive
predictive value
predictive value
ThinPrep® 76.40% 68.10% 86.60% 51.70%
HPV DNA test 79.80% 62.30% 84.90% 53.80%
Cervicography®(DCS®) 81.00% 75.40% 89.80% 59.80%
ThinPrep® +HPV DNA test 86.70% 52.90% 83.00% 60.00%
ThinPrep® +Cervicography®(DCS®) 89.00% 48.50% 84.00% 57.90%
HPV DNA test
96.00% 35.40% 80.20% 76.70%
(Period: 12/01/2001~09/30/2005)


NTLasia Gobizkorea.com