The acetic acid test in evaluation of subclinical genital papillomavirus infection: a comparative study on penoscopy, histopathology, virology and scanning electron microscopy findings.

Abstract

Use of the acetic acid test for evaluation of GPVI should be combined with a colposcopic evaluation based on strict topographic hallmarks, followed by a directed biopsy for light microscopic evaluation. We found that the positive predictive value of colposcopy was as high when correlated with histopathological findings (72%) as when virological methods were used, whether HPV DNA hybridisation testing was performed with the well established SB and ISH assays (45%), or by applying the newly introduced and highly sensitive PCR assay as well (71%). False positivity from the acetic acid test occurs and is mainly due to inflammatory conditions but also to the presence of other conditions. Epithelial fissures are evidently associated with some subclinical GPVI lesions and may potentially represent loci minores for infectious stimuli and perhaps facilitate the transmission of some blood-borne STDs. We prose that the term "papillomavirus balanoposthitis" should be used for penile HPV infection associated with inflammatory responses. Our study indicates that PIN III frequently occurs in a subclinical form and may be associated with not only previously identified "high-risk" HPV types such as type 16, but also with the HPV type 42 that has not previously been considered as oncogenic.