This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

R. Marshall Austin, MD, PhD
Charleston, SC

JAMA. 1990;263(24):3260.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

I recently read with interest the article by Dr Ohrt¹ and his reply to the letter by Dr Keffer.² I was particularly interested in his comments on the preferred method of follow-up for mild atypias not diagnostic for dysplasia. He stated: "Many of us are confident that mild atypia does regress spontaneously in a large majority of cases and that those cases that fail to regress can be followed up successfully with repeated testing and treatment. I am not aware of data that suggest that this type of conservative management should be abandoned."

Dr Ohrt's attention should be drawn to the work of Jones and Creasman³ entitled "Evaluation of the Atypical Pap Smear." The authors studied 236 consecutively referred patients with atypical but not dysplastic Papanicolaou smears, found 58 follow-up biopsyproved cases of dysplasia (25%), and noted that repeated Papanicolaou smears identified only . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?