The Bethedsa System 2001 Workshop Report.
- Author:
Eun Kyung HONG
1
;
Jong Hee NAM
;
Moon Hyang PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Pathology, National Cancer Center, College of Medicine, Chonnam National University. Chonnam, Korea. parkmh@hanyang.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Editorial
- Keywords:
The Bethesda System;
The Bethesda System 2001;
Cervicovaginal cytopatholgy;
Reporting system
- MeSH:
Diagnosis;
Education*;
Humans;
Maryland;
Molecular Biology;
National Cancer Institute (U.S.);
Pathology;
Virology
- From:Korean Journal of Cytopathology
2001;12(1):1-15
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
The Bethesda System (TBS) was first developed in 1988 for the need to enhance the communication of the cytopathologic findings to the referring physician in unambiguous diagnostic terms. The terminology used in this reporting system should reflect current understanding of the pathogenesis of cervical/vaginal disease, so the framework of the reporting system should be flexible enough to accommodate advances in medicine, including virology, molecular biology, and pathology. Three years after the introduction of TBS, the second Bethesda workshop was held to set or amend diagnostic criteria for each categories of TBS. TBS 1991 is now widely used. The third Bethesda workshop, The Bethesda System 2001 Workshop, was held in National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland from April 30 to May 2, 2001. Again, the goals of this workshop were to promote effective communication and to clarify in reporting cervical cytopathology results to clinicians and to provide with the information to make appropriate decisions about diagnosis and treatment. Nine forum groups were made and there were Web-based bulletin board discussions between October, 2000 and the first week of April, 2001. On the basis of bulletin board comments and discussions, the forum moderators recommended revised terminologies in the Workshop. Hot discussions were followed after the presentation by forum moderators during the workshop. Terminologies confusing clinicians and providing no additional informations regarding patient management were deleted in the workshop to clarify the cervicovaginal cytology results. Any informations related to the patient management were encouraged to add. So 'Satisfactory for evaluation but limited by' of 'Specimen Adequacy' catergory was deleted. Terminology of 'Unsatisfactory' was further specified as 'Specimen rejected' and 'Specimen processed and examined, but unsatisfactory'. Terminologies of 'Benign Cellular Change' and 'Within Normal Limits' were combined and terminology was changed to 'Negative for intraepithelial lesion
