These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparative study of in situ hybridization and immunohistochemical techniques for the detection of human papillomavirus in lesions of the uterine cervix.
    Author: Alonso MJ, Gomez F, Muñoz E, Abad MM, Roldan M, Curiel I, Paz JI, Bullon A, Lopez-Bravo A.
    Journal: Eur J Histochem; 1992; 36(3):271-8. PubMed ID: 1281009.
    Abstract:
    Among the techniques currently used for the detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) in genital lesions, only two correlate HPV with the histopathological findings of the lesion: immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization. Consequently, we were prompted to carry out a comparative study on both techniques to check their utility and efficacy as routine diagnostic methods. 52 biopsy specimens of uterine cervix diagnosed histopathologically as condylomas and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia+koilocytosis were studied by immunohistochemical and in situ hybridization techniques using a polyclonal antibody against the common antigen of the HPV capsid and three biotinylated DNA probes specific to HPV types 6/11, 16/18 and 31/35/51. Immunohistochemistry detected 21 positive cases (40.38%), whereas in situ hybridization detected 40 positive cases (76.92%); of the latter, 30 were positive for HPV types 6/11, 3 for HPV types 16/18 and 11 for HPV types 31/35/51. The results suggest that in situ hybridization is a more sensitive technique than immunohistochemistry. However, we recommend the use of both techniques in the case of potentially malignant lesions since better prognostic information can be obtained from joint analysis of both results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]