The Value of Repeat Pap Smear at the Time of Initial Colposcopy

Abstract Objective. The objective was to determine if repeating a Pap smear at the time of an initial colposcopy has sufficient clinical benefit to justify its clinical and financial costs. Methods. The records were reviewed of all patients who had an initial colposcopy at Queens Hospital Center between 1984 and 1995. Data were gathered regarding the referral cytology, the cytology done at the time of colposcopy, and the results of any biopsies which were taken. The terminology for cytology and histology done prior to 1989 was adjusted to the Bethesda classification system. A repeat Pap smear was defined as clinically valuable if it would have changed the patient's management, i.e., if it suggested more advanced disease than the referral Pap and that the disease was not identified on the colposcopically directed biopsy. Results. Two thousand nine hundred sixty-nine records were reviewed. In 139 cases, no Pap smear was repeated at the time of colposcopy. Of the remaining 2830 women, only 1347 (47.6%) showed exact correlation between their referral Pap smear and the Pap done at the time of colposcopy. In another 1016 (35.9%), the Pap at colposcopy was within one grade of the referral Pap. In 312 women, the Pap at the time of colposcopy was a higher grade than the referral Pap. However, in 236, the higher grade of disease was detected by the colposcopically directed biopsy. Of the remaining 76 women, 58 had a normal biopsy, but their Pap at the time of colposcopy showed low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (44) or high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HGSIL) (14). Seventeen others had a biopsy showing low-grade dysplasia while the Pap at the time of colposcopy showed HGSIL. In 1 patient, the repeat Pap showed malignant cells while the biopsy showed a high-grade lesion. Based on the triage protocols at our institution, this means that a repeat Pap at the time of colposcopy would have indicated a cone biopsy in 31 patients (1.1%) and more careful follow-up of another 44 patients (1.6%). Skipping the repeat Pap smear would not have resulted in any missed cancers. In our series of 2830 patients, the cost savings of skipping the repeat smear would have been $68,580 or $24.23 per patient. On a national level, skipping the repeat smear would save more than $24,000,000 annually. Conclusion. Using current triage protocols at our institution, repeating the Pap smear at the time of an initial colposcopy would have changed the management in 2.7% of patients and indicated a conization in only 1.1% of patients. It is doubtful that this justifies its cost and the potential detrimental effects on the colposcopic examination.