Progression or Regression? - Strengths and Weaknesses of the New Munich Nomenclature III for Cervix Cytology.

Introduction: Since 01. 01. 2015 the new Munich nomenclature III for gynaecological diagnostics of the cervix has been in force. The changes have led to controversial scientific discussions. This study reports for the first time on the consequences. Materials and Methods: The present data are based on smear screening results for the year 2014. The data of 63 134 patients were evaluated. Results: 2.27 % of all smears were remarkable. Group IIa was assigned to 0.91 %. Group II-p was somewhat more frequently recorded than group IIID1 (0.59 vs. 0.53 %). Groups IIID1 and IIID2 were found in 0.53 and 0.61 %, respectively, of the cases. Agreement with histology was found in 36.84 and 44.68 %, respectively. Glandular lesions represented the most frequent changes in group III. Histological clarification was obtained for 0.18 % of all remarkable findings. The relative incidence of high-grade precancerous conditions (CIN III) and invasive tumours amounted to 0.1 %. Conclusion: A close communication between gynaecologists and cytologists is mandatory for the correct usage of the new nomenclature. The future annual statistics of the health insurances can now be analysed in more detail. A statistical classification of glandular epithelial changes is now also possible for the first time. The heterogeneous group IIa constitutes an unnecessary uncertainty for patients and physicians. The splitting of the group IIID does not appear to have any advantage for the further clinical management. Further studies are needed to show whether or not the classification can stand up to international comparisons.