ReviewMund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie : MKG2007
[Oral cytology: historical development, current status, and perspectives].
Review in Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie : MKG, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and cytological study of the oral mucosa of smoking and non-smoking qat chewers in Yemen.Clinical oral investigations · 2016Article
- Transepithelial Brush Biopsy - Oral CDx® - A Noninvasive Method for the Early Detection of Precancerous and Cancerous Lesions.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2014Article
- Bacterial colonization of microbial biofilms in oral squamous cell carcinoma.Clinical oral investigations · 2014Article
- Techniques for precancerous lesion diagnosis.Journal of oncology · 2011Article
- Article
- Early detection in head and neck cancer - current state and future perspectives.GMS current topics in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery · 2008Article
- [Identification of a recurrent oral squamous cell carcinoma by brush cytology].Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie : MKG · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral cytology has aroused new interest caused by introduction of the cytobrush as a sampling device and the use of additional analytical methods. By brushing it is possible to reach deeper layers of the oral mucosa where squamous intraepithelial neoplasia (SIN) begins. The biological potential of the oral epithelial cells obtained can be evaluated by the following additional methods: computer-assisted image analysis (OralCDx), DNA cytometry, immunohistochemistry, monolayer cytology, and molecular biological analysis. All of those methods can increase sensitivity (up to 100%) and specificity (up to 100%) of oral brush biopsy. Nevertheless, there are reports that oral epithelial carcinomas were not identified. No comparative study exists allowing conclusions to be drawn about the value of the single methods. Immunocytochemistry with commercial antibodies against laminin-5 is generally available and methodologically easy. Oral brush biopsy as a non invasive diagnostic method can be useful for the early detection of oral mucosal lesions. Positive findings or progression of the lesion despite negative findings are indications to refer the patient to a specialized clinic where a surgical biopsy should be performed, followed by histopathological analysis. Histopathology remains the gold standard for the definitive diagnosis of oral malignant lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.