ArticleRadiology and oncology2012
What sampling device is the most appropriate for vaginal vault cytology in gynaecological cancer follow up?
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical trial comparing the use of OrcellexJournal of gynecologic oncology · 2025Trial
- Impact of a Search Engine on Clinical Decisions Under Time and System Effectiveness Constraints: Research Protocol.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- Comparative study between liquid-based cytology & conventional Pap smear for cytological follow up of treated patients of cancer cervix.The Indian journal of medical research · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedLino, Del Pup [corrected to Del Pup, Lino]; Vincenzo, Canzonieri [corrected to Canzonieri, Vincenzo]; Diego, Serraino [corrected to Serraino, Diego]; Elio, Campagnutta [corrected to Campagnutta, Elio]
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn women with cancer-related hysterectomy, the vaginal vault cytology has a low efficacy - when performed by conventional methods - for the early detection of vaginal recurrence. The amount of exfoliated cells collected is generally low because of atrophy, and the vaginal vault corners can be so narrow that the commonly used Ayres spatula cannot often penetrate deeply into them. This prospective study aimed at identifying the advantages obtained in specimens collection using the cytobrush, as compared to the Ayres's spatula. PATIENTS AND METHODS.: 141 gynaecologic cancer patients were studied to compare samplings collected with Ayre's spatula or with cytobrush. In a pilot setting of 15 patients, vaginal cytology samples obtained by both Ayre's spatula and cytobrush were placed at the opposite sites of a single slide for quali-quantitative evaluation. Thereafter, the remaining 126 consecutive women were assigned to either group A (spatula) or B (cytobrush) according to the order of entry. The same gynaecologist performed all the procedures.
resultsIn all 15 pilot cases, the cytobrush seemed to collect a higher quantity of material. The comparative analysis of the two complete groups indicated that the cytobrush technique was more effective than the spatula one. The odds ratio (OR) for an optimal cytology using the cytobrush was 2.8 (95% confidence interval -C.I. 1.3-6.2; chi-square test, p=0.008).
conclusionsVaginal vault cytology with cytobrush turned out to better perform than the traditional Ayre's spatula to obtain an adequate sampling in gynecological cancer patients.
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.