The ThinPrep Difference
ThinPrep Imaging System
Independent studies have shown that the ThinPrep Imaging System with Dual Review provides additional disease detection over manually reviewed ThinPrep Pap Test slides.
Miller, et al. 2007: improved LSIL and HSIL detection with the ThinPrep Imaging System1
In 2007, Miller and colleagues reported a 37% increase in LSIL and a 42% increase in HSIL detection with the ThinPrep Imaging System compared with manually reviewed ThinPrep Pap Test slides.1,2
Lozano 2006: improved ASC, LSIL, and HSIL detection with the ThinPrep Imaging System3
In a retrospective analysis of 39,717 tests, Lozano found increased detection rates of 59.4% for ASC, 45.9% for LSIL, and 37.9% for HSIL with the ThinPrep Imaging System vs manually reviewed ThinPrep Pap Test slides.
Dzuira, et al. 2005: improved ASC-US, ASC-H, LSIL, and HSIL detection with the ThinPrep Imaging System4
In a retrospective analysis of 55,250 tests, Dzuira and collegues found increased detection rates of 29.0% for ASC-US, 50.0% for ASC-H, 30.7% for LIL, and 20.0% for HSIL.
1. Miller FS, Nagel LE, Kenny-Moynihan MB. Implementation of the ThinPrep Imaging System in a high volume metropolitan laboratory. Diag Cytopath. 2007;35:213-7.
2. The Imager clinical trial results showed a statistically significant increase in ASCUS+ sensitivity of 6.4% [95% CI: 2.6-10.0], a statistically significant increase in HSIL+ specificity of 0.2% [95% CI: 0.06-0.4], and a reduction in false negative fraction of 39% (based on ASCUS+ sensitivity). The unsatisfactory rate was not evaluated for statistical significance, but a decrease was observed.
3. Lozano R. Comparison of computer-assisted and manual screening of cervical cytology. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;104:134-8.
4. Dziura B, Quinn S, Richard K. Performance of an imaging system vs. manual screening in detection of squamous intraepithelial lesions of the uterine cervix. Acta Cytol. 2006;50:309-11.