9a. Terminology and criteria for adequacy

Introduction

An agreed terminology for cervical cytology is not only important to ensure consistency of screening and reporting slides but also to enable cytology results to be compared between laboratories, regions and countries, and to be correlated with colposcopy findings, histopathology results and clinical outcome. 

Among the countries of Europe and to an even greater extent worldwide, the terminology has to be compatible with numerous different languages as well as existing traditional systems.  The European guidelines took this into account while “strongly recommending that all terminological systems should be translatable into the categories used by the Bethesda system” (Herbert et al. 2007). 

This principle is followed in Eurocytology, which refers to the second edition of the Bethesda system (TBS) (Nayar & Solomon 2004) and the 2014 update (Nayar & Wilbur 2015) and explains differences in existing and commonly used terminology within the framework of the Bethesda system (TBS).  

The EU guidelines strongly recommend that all terminological systems for reporting cervical cytopathology should be translatable into the Bethesda system

 

X