The evolutionary journey of cervical cancer screening has been a major medical success story, considering the substantial role it has played in dwindling the disease burden. Through sustained collaborative efforts within the medical community, significant advances have been made from the humble yet path-breaking conventional Pap smear to the current automated screening systems and human papillomavirus (HPV) molecular testing. With the integration of artificial intelligence into screening techniques, we are currently at the precipice of circumventing the pitfalls of manual cytology readings and improving the efficiency of the screening systems by a significant margin. Despite the technological milestones traversed, the high logistics and operational cost, besides the technical know-how of operating the automated systems, can pose a major practical challenge in the widespread adoption of these advanced techniques in cervical cancer screening programs. This would suggest the need to adopt strategies that are tailored to the demands and needs of the different settings keeping their limitations in mind. This review aims to take the reader through the entire evolutionary journey of cervical cancer screening programs, highlight the individual merits and demerits of each technique, and discuss the recommendations from the major global guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers among females, contributing to significant mortality and morbidity worldwide. These numbers have significantly decreased since the implementation of cervical cancer screening. Despite that, screening in many countries, including Saudi Arabia, remains suboptimal.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between May to November 2021 among 385 women aged 21-65 years who live in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The data were collected using a four-part online survey: demographic characteristics, cervical cancer screening status, predictors of undergoing cervical cancer screening, and barriers to screening.
RESULTS: Among the 385 women who completed the survey, only around one-third (33.4%) had a Pap smear at some point in their lives. The factors that were found to be significantly associated with the screening status (having a Pap test) in the univariate analysis are increasing age, education level, monthly income, perceived risk of getting cervical cancer, source of information about Pap test, having a family doctor, recommendation by the family doctor to have a Pap test, undergoing a gynecological examination, visiting a gynecologist in the past, history of previous gynecological complaint, and history of abortion. In the multivariable analysis, only four factors were found to be significantly associated with the screening status: age, monthly income, undergoing a gynecological examination in the past, and the recommendation by the family doctor, which by far had the largest effect.
CONCLUSIONS: Cervical cancer screening rate is relatively low in the city of Jeddah. The recommendation of a Pap test by the family doctor had the largest impact on screening status. These results support the important role of family physicians in promoting screening tests for preventive healthcare. The results also suggest the need for education programs to promote cervical cancer screening among women in Saudi Arabia.

Introduction After the introduction of cervical cancer screening program with cervical cytology, a marked decline in deaths secondary to cervical cancer was observed in developed countries. Two methods are used for cervical cytology. The first one is the conventional Papanicolaou (PAP) and the second one is liquid-based cytology (LBC). Although various studies in western countries established the role of LBC in cervical cancer screening, no large-scale study was conducted in our population to compare the two techniques for cervical cancer screening. Therefore, in this study, we compared the diagnostic utility of these two techniques for detecting cervical epithelial lesions. Methods A total of 3,929 patients, who presented to the Gynecology Clinic, Liaquat National Hospital, for cervical cancer screening from January 2015 until December 2019, over a period of five years, were included in the study. A total of 1,503 specimens were prepared by LBC, and 2,426 specimens were prepared by a conventional PAP smear method. All smears were interpreted using the Bethesda System of Reporting Cytopathology. Results The mean age of the patients was 39.46±11.14 years. For cytological evaluation, 98.7% of specimens were adequate. The inadequacy rate was 1.3% for conventional PAP smear and 1.2% for LBC. While 97.2% of specimens were reported as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy, 1.1% of specimens showed squamous epithelial lesions. There was a significant difference in the detection rate of squamous epithelial lesions using the two techniques. The detection rate of squamous intraepithelial lesions using LBC was 2.1%, which was higher than that of the conventional PAP smear (0.6%). The detection rates of glandular lesions using LBC and conventional PAP smear were 0.5% and 0.2%, respectively. Conclusion We found a higher disease detection rate of squamous epithelial lesions using LBC compared to conventional PAP smear. Therefore, we recommend a widespread use of LBC for mass cervical cancer screening in our population.