Adherence to practice guidelines for atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology

Atypical glandular cells (AGC) on cervical cytology are high-risk, requiring an extensive evaluation. Compliance with practice guidelines for AGC, however, has been low. Some AGC cytology reports contain cytopathologist recommendations for evaluation. This study determines whether evaluation rates for AGC have improved over time, and whether cytopathologists' recommendations correlate with the types of evaluation women receive.

Evaluation rates from 284 women with AGC (2004-2007) were compared with findings from 1998-2001. Rates of evaluations were compared based on cytology report recommendations.

A total of 76.1% of the AGC cases had histologic sampling, and 58.8% had a comprehensive evaluation. These rates are higher than those from 1998-2001 (63.5% and 35.8%, respectively; P<.01). Rates of evaluations of women with AGC "favor neoplasia" did not increase between the 2 time periods. Between 2004-2005 and 2006-2007, rates of comprehensive initial evaluations and endometrial sampling in women ≥35 years of age did not increase. Of the AGC reports that did contain cytopathologist recommendations, 28% were consistent with practice guidelines, 26% recommended an incomplete histologic evaluation, and 46% recommended repeat cytology. Women whose AGC report recommended a comprehensive evaluation or any histologic evaluation were more likely to have a comprehensive work-up (79%) than those whose reports did not contain recommendations (55%, P <0.01) or recommended repeat cytology (51%, P<0.02).

Adherence to practice guidelines for the evaluation of women with AGC has improved but continues to be suboptimal. Our findings suggest that continuing education and including practice guidelines on AGC cytology reports may improve compliance.