Do borderline nuclear changes in gynaecological cytlogy constitute a reliable reporting category?

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Fourteen laboratories participated in a national slide exchange study to investigate whether borderline nuclear changes (BNC) constitute a reliable reporting category. Slides were submitted by participating laboratories, having achieved a 100% intralaboratory consensus at the primary screener, checker, and medical levels. Sets of seven slides were examined in laboratories for 1 week, and exchanges were undertaken over a 6-month period. Each laboratory was requested to submit three consensus opinions on each slide at the primary screener, checker, and medical levels. Response patterns for submitted slides achieving a reporting category consensus at the 50 and 80% consensus levels indicated that negative, BNC, and mild dyskaryosis are distinct and comparable categories. Similarly, the two subcategories of BNC with or without human papillomavirus (HPV) are nearly as distinct as the overall BNC category. The percentage of submitted slides achieving consensus at consensus levels between 50 and 80% produced variable findings with regard to the practical success of the main reporting categories. The negative category was reasonably successful, whereas mild dyskaryosis was consistently poor. Borderline nuclear changes were successful at the 50% consensus level but showed a rapid decline by the 65% consensus level. The reason(s) for this remains speculative but indicates a possible potential of BNC to work successfully with additional training and education. Reporting practices were not consistent among the laboratories and differences were identified between medical and nonmedical staff. A high use of the BNC category was noted in slides that failed to achieve consensus. A national study assessing all grades of abnormalities would appear essential.