{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,24]],"date-time":"2025-04-24T04:34:05Z","timestamp":1745469245384,"version":"3.40.4"},"reference-count":16,"publisher":"S. Karger AG","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]],"date-time":"2013-12-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1386633600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Services\/SiteLicenses"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]],"date-time":"2013-12-10T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1386633600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Services\/SiteLicenses"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Acta Cytologica"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Objective:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; Previous studies have demonstrated diagnostic discrepancies for the detection of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2\/3) from previously confirmed cytological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). The goal of this study is to investigate the possible factors which may be responsible for this diagnostic discrepancy. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Study Design:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; The study included all the cytological specimens diagnosed with a HSIL by the Papanicolaou (Pap) test at Temple University Hospital (2000-2010) as well as timely follow-up cervical biopsies. The biopsy tissue types and diagnoses were subsequently categorized and analyzed. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Results:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; Of the total 842 Pap tests with HSIL diagnosis, 96 cases (11.4%) showed non-CIN 2\/3 in follow-up cervical biopsies. Among those cases, the most common biopsy diagnoses were cervicitis (27.9%) and CIN 1 (25%). Endocervical curettage (ECC) samples showed a high percentage of inadequacy for diagnosis (43.7%). Thirty-seven cases had subsequent follow-up biopsy, and CIN 2\/3 was found in 15 cases. However, none of the CIN 2\/3 cases was detected by ECC sampling. &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Conclusions:&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt; Our study indicated that the discrepant correlation between HSIL and CIN 2\/3 was most likely due to tissue sampling issues during colposcopic examination. The diagnostic value of ECC remains poor for the detection and grading of cervical intraepithelial dysplasia.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1159\/000356988","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]],"date-time":"2013-12-10T07:39:01Z","timestamp":1386661141000},"page":"47-52","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Correlation Discrepancies between High-Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions and High-Grade Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Cytological\/Histological Correlation Study from a Single-Institution Experience"],"prefix":"10.1159","volume":"58","author":[{"given":"Ming","family":"Zhang","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Michael","family":"Carrozza","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Yajue","family":"Huang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"127","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.287.16.2114"},{"key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1309\/AJCP9TO1OMXLDDPI"},{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5858\/arpa.2010-0658-OA"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/LGT.0b013e318285423c"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3181834637"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogc.2008.09.007"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ygyno.2006.08.056"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3182883a34"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1006\/gyno.2001.6323"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2005.10.204"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(02)02581-4"},{"key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000220505.18525.85"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2004.02.065"},{"key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0029-7844(98)00245-2"},{"key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cncy.20020"},{"key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000270154.69879.09"}],"container-title":["Acta Cytologica"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Article\/Pdf\/356988","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.karger.com\/Article\/Pdf\/356988","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,4,23]],"date-time":"2025-04-23T18:23:28Z","timestamp":1745432608000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/article\/doi\/10.1159\/000356988"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]]},"references-count":16,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2014,2,1]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2014,1,22]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1159\/000356988","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0001-5547","1938-2650"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0001-5547"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1938-2650"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,12,10]]}}}