ArticleHNO2008
[Performance of conventional oral brush biopsies].
Article in HNO, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically evident lesions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic tests for oral cancer and potentially malignant disorders in patients presenting with clinically evident lesions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial.Head & face medicine · 2018Trial
- Evaluation of Role of Visual Inspection Using Acetic Acid (VIA) and Exfoliative Cytology in Screening and Early Detection of Oral Premalignant Lesions and Oral Cancer.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2021Article
- Liquid-based versus conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a split-sample pilot study.Clinical oral investigations · 2017Article
- Diagnostic efficiency of differentiating small cancerous and precancerous lesions using mucosal brush smears of the oral cavity--a prospective and blinded study.Clinical oral investigations · 2011Article
- Efficacy of oral brush cytology in the evaluation of the oral premalignant and malignant lesions.Journal of cytology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the performance of oral brush biopsies using standard morphological analysis and haematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining for detecting oral squamous cell carcinomas and their respective precursor lesions PATIENTS AND
methodsBrush biopsies were obtained in 169 consecutive patients who underwent routine biopsies and histological examination for clinically suspicious oral lesions. Air-dried smears were processed by acetone fixation and HE staining. Cytological assessment used well-established criteria of atypia to classify the specimen as either "tumor negative" (no signs of atypia, no malignant cells) or "tumor positive" (malignant cells, any sign of atypia or doubtful cells).
resultsDespite a sufficient number of cells, a definite cytological diagnosis could not be established in six cases. According to the criteria specified above, these specimens were classified as "tumor positive." The cytological analysis identified 49 out of 62 oral malignancies (sensitivity 79%). Seven out of 107 benign lesions were classified as false positive (specificity 93%). The positive and negative predictive values were each 88%.
conclusionOral brush biopsies will identify only about 80% of oral malignancies when the smears are processed by routine HE stains and are analysed via standard morphological criteria. Thus, this technique should not be used for diagnostic proof or to exclude malignant cells in a lesion suspicious for cancer. However, oral brush biopsy provides a versatile back-up strategy to uncover the true nature of the disease if a lesion is clinically considered benign by mistake.
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.