Comparison of the Efficacy of Sediment Cytology over Oral Brush Cytology in Oral Leukoplakia.

Autor:	Hosmani JV; Oral Pathology Division, Department of Diagnostic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia, jhosmani@kku.edu.sa., Pujari VK; Department of Oral Pathology, Maratha Mandal's NGH Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Belgaum, India., Kotrashetti VS; Department of Oral Pathology, Maratha Mandal's NGH Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Belgaum, India., Nayak RS; Department of Oral Pathology, Maratha Mandal's NGH Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Belgaum, India., Babji DV; Department of Oral Pathology, Maratha Mandal's NGH Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Belgaum, India., Patanshetti SM; Department of Oral Pathology, Maratha Mandal's NGH Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Center, Belgaum, India.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Acta cytologica [Acta Cytol] 2020; Vol. 64 (4), pp. 368-374. Date of Electronic Publication: 2019 Oct 08.
DOI:	10.1159/000503216
Abstrakt:	Introduction: A method called sediment cytology includes the investigation of smears arranged from the sediment of the biopsy specimen fixatives. The sediment from this fixative is used to prepare smears and provides a potentially rich source for cytological material. Investigation of the fixative sediment and understanding of the cytological picture with pertinent clinical and radiological information permits diagnosis in a few hours. Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of sediment cytology and oral brush cytology compared with histopathological findings in oral leukoplakia (OL) cases. Methods: Cytological smears were obtained from 30 clinically diagnosed OL lesions using 2 techniques: oral cytobrush and 10% formalin fixative sedimentation. Both smears were stained with Papanicolaou. Cytological smear evaluation was conducted with respect to cellularity, cell distribution, cellular clumping, and the presence of blood, debris, inflammatory cells, and microbial colonies. The cytopathological scores for all cases were compared between sediment and brush cytology and correlated with the histopathological diagnosis. For statistical analysis, the κ test and the Wilcoxon matched-pair test were used. Results: The cytobrush technique had a sensitivity of 83.3% for OL cases histopathologically diagnosed as severe dysplasia, while the sediment cytology technique had a sensitivity of 16.6%. For moderate/mild dysplasia cases, the cytobrush technique had a sensitivity of 7.7%, whereas the sediment technique showed no diagnostic sensitivity. Conclusion: Based on the results from the present study, sediment cytology, unlike oral brush cytology, is not a useful screening tool for the preliminary diagnosis of potentially malignant oral lesions. (© 2019 S. Karger AG, Basel.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu