Literatura
Kontakt Forum RSS
Ginekologija
Brojni znanstvenici istražuju uzroke, a drugi nastoje pronaći brzu i učinkovitu pomoć za liječenje ginekoloških oboljenja. Većina njih usmjerena je na tjelesne smetnje, dok je manje učinjeno na razjašnjenju psiholoških mehanizama povezanih s ovim tegobama.

Literatura

Vezano
Vezani članci
Bethesda klasifikacija
Datum zadnje izmjene: 6. siječnja 2017.




IARC Working Group on Evaluation of Cervical Cancer Screening Programmes. Screening for squamous cervical cancer: duration of low risk after negative results of cervical cytology and its implication for screening policies BMJ 1986; 293 (6548): 659-64

Saseieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer 2003; 89 (1): 88-93

Sawaya GF, McConnell KJ, Kulasingam SL et al. Risk of cervical cancer associated with extending the interval between cervical-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 1501-9

Kulasingam Sl, Myers ER, Lawson HW et al. Cost-effectiveness of extending cervical cancer screening intervals among women with prior normal pap tests. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 49: 1499-504

NHSCSP. Guidelines for NHS Cervical Screening Programme. Second edition. Colposcopy and Programme Management. NHSCSP Publication No 20; May 2010.

Quinn M, Babb P, Jones J, Allen E. Effect of scoring on the incidence of and mortality from cancer of the cervix in England: evaluation based on routinely collected statistics. BMJ 1999; 318 (7188): 904-8

Flannelly G, Monaghan J, Cruickshank M et al. Cervical screening in women over the age of 50: results of a population-based multicentre study. BJOG 2004; 111 (4): 362-8

Rebolj M, van Ballegooijen M, Lynge E et al. Incidence of cervical cancer after several negative smear results by age 50: prospective observational study. BMJ 2009; 338: b809

Gustafsson L, Sparen P, Gustafsson M et al. Low efficiency of cytologic screening for cancer in situ of the cervix in older women. Int J Cancer 1995; 63 (6): 804-9

Sasieni P, Adams J, Cuzick J. Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from UK audit of screening histories. Br J Cancer 2003; 89 (1): 88-93

Cruickshank ME, Angus V, Kelly M et al. The case for stopping cervical screening at age fifty. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 104 (5): 586-9

Can Winjngaarden W, Dncan ID. Rationale for stopping cervical screening in women over fifty. BMJ 1993; 306: 967-71

Sherlaw C, Johnson S, Gallivan S, Jenkins D. Withdrawing low risk women from cervical screening programmes: mathematical modeling study. BMJ 1999; 318: 356-1 Stokes-Lampard H, Wilson S, Waddell C et al. Vaginal vault smears after hysterectomy for reasons other than malignancy: a systematic review of the literature. BJOG 2006; 113: 1354-65

Kalogirou D, Antoniou G, Karakitsos P et al. Vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia (VAIN) following hysterectomy in patients treated for carcinoma in situ of the cervix. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1997; 18: 188-91

Silman FH, Fruchter RG, Chen YS et al. Vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia: risk factors for persistence, recurrence and invasion and its management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 93-9

ACOG Practice Bulletin No 109. Cervical Cytology Screening. 2009.

Kurman RJ, Solomon D. The Bethesda system for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1994.

Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A et al. The 2001 Bethesda system. Terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002; 287:2114-9.

Ovanin-Rakić A, Pajtler M, Stanković T et al. Klasifikacija citoloških nalaza vrata maternice “Zagreb 2002”. Modifikacija klasifikacija “Zagreb 1990” i “NCI Bethesda system 2001”. Gynaecol Perinatol 2003; 12:148-53.

Vrdoljak-Mozetič D. PAPA test danas – nova 'Bethesda' klasifikacija. Medix 2005; 11 (58):85-9
Literatura