|
Re: 2 irregular unreadable paps
From: Hannah (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Thu, 29 May 2003 09:13:46 -0500 (CDT)
I beg to differ with Dr. Braun. "Irregular and unreadable" sounds like
ASCUS to me. Usually the term used for a collection/preparation problem
is "unsatisfactory for examination". The fact that her doc is referring
her to colpo is further evidence of this: it's the recommended procedure
when two consecutive Paps come back ASCUS.
At Wed, 28 May 2003, R. Daniel Braun, MD wrote:
>
>At Wed, 28 May 2003, Merle wrote:
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I'm 32 years old and my last two paps were unreadable and irregular. The
>>second pap was a follow up to the first one. I've been tested for STD's
>>and I am all clean..negative. My doctor wants to perform a coposcopy. I
>>understand it's a 30 minute procedure to look closely at everything
>>including my cervix. Does this mean I may have pre-cancerous cells? Or
>>the beginning of cervical cancer? Or are there other ailments that this
>>procedure can discover.
>>
>>Please advise. Thanks.
>
>If they were unreadable, there was something wrong with the manner in
>which they were collected or prepared once they got to the lab. It
>doesn't mean there is anything wrong with you. It means they can't
>tell.
>
>--
>R.Daniel Braun, MD FACOG FOG
>**Note: Opinions expressed here are for educational purposes only
>and, as such, do not constitute a physician-patient relationship.
>This information is not intended to supplant the need for you to
>consult with your physician prior to choosing therapeutic options
>and/or interventions.
>
>**Private emails cannot be entertained due to time constraints,
>consequently no private emails will receive a response.
>
>**Thank you for your understanding ;-)
>
>Please be aware that all e-mail on this forum is archived and can be viewed at
>http://forums.obgyn.net/womens-health,
>http://forums.obgyn.net/pregnancy-birth or
>http://forums.obgyn.net/young-women
>and is accessible to anybody on the
>internet including internet search engines. This should be taken into
>consideration before sending postings of a personal or confidential nature.
>
|
|