Is magnification necessary to confirm visual inspection of cervical abnormalities? A randomized trial in Peru

OBJECTIVES: Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women in developing countries. This study was designed to evaluate whether visual inspection with acetic acid and magnification (VIAM) improved confirmation of cervical lesions as compared to confirmation with visual inspection w...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública
Main Authors: Jennifer L. Winkler, Kristen Lewis, Roberto Del Aguila, Miguel Gonzales, José Manuel Delgado, Vivien D. Tsu, John W. Sellors
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Spanish
Portuguese
Published: Pan American Health Organization 2008
Subjects:
Neoplasmas del cuello uterino
diagnóstico
cribado
Perú
Medicine
R
Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine
RC955-962
Public aspects of medicine
RA1-1270
Arctic
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1590/s1020-49892008000100001
https://doaj.org/article/49ed779f48e94cba9cb9160827c109d5
Description
Summary:OBJECTIVES: Cervical cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women in developing countries. This study was designed to evaluate whether visual inspection with acetic acid and magnification (VIAM) improved confirmation of cervical lesions as compared to confirmation with visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) without magnification when used by physicians. METHODS: From April-December 2004, women in San Martin, Peru, who were referred as VIA-positive by an "obstetriz" (a professional midwife with 6 years of university training) were randomized into two groups for confirmatory screening by a physician using either VIA or VIAM with an AviScope,TM a hand-held 4x magnification scope with a green light source. The reference standard for the presence or absence of cervical neoplasia was colposcopy and directed biopsy, as required. RESULTS: A total of 358 women participated in the study; 161 had a confirmatory examination with VIAM and 159 with VIA. Sensitivity for low- or high-grade lesions was 68% with VIA and 77% with VIAM, and specificity was 62% with VIA and 63% with VIAM; however, these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: For settings where physician confirmation of cervical abnormalities identified through visual inspection is required and available, this study demonstrates that VIAM had no significant advantage over VIA.

Similar Items