ArticleClinical oral investigations2017
Liquid-based versus conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a split-sample pilot study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Seedless One-Pot Synthesis of Colloidal InAs Quantum Dots Enabling a High-Accuracy Photoplethysmography Oximeter.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Exploring the potential of interdental brush in oral cytology: a pilot study on sampling efficiency.BMC oral health · 2025Observational
- Cytopathological quantification of NORs using artificial intelligence to oral cancer screening.Brazilian oral research · 2025Article
- The Diagnostic Potential of Non-Invasive Tools for Oral Cancer and Precancer: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Enzyme-labeled liquid-based cytology (ELLBC): a new noninvasive diagnostic method for bladder cancers.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024Article
- Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Focus on Biomarkers for Screening.Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2024Review
- A deep learning model using hyperspectral image for EUS-FNA cytology diagnosis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Assessment of Cytological Changes in the Oral Mucosa in Young Hematological Patients Treated with Systemic Chemotherapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of oral brush liquid-based cytology for oral squamous cell carcinoma: a comparative study of cytological and histological diagnoses at a single center.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Clinicopathologic factors influencing the screening accuracy of oral cytology: A retrospective cohort study.Oncology letters · 2022Article
- A Systematic Review of Oral Biopsies, Sample Types, and Detection Techniques Applied in Relation to Oral Cancer Detection.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2022Review
- Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology.Diagnostic pathology · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Liquid-Based Oral Brush Cytology in Screening for Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cancers · 2019Article
- Bacterial Colonization and Tissue Compatibility of Denture Base Resins.Dentistry journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this prospective split sample study was to evaluate the applicability of liquid-based cytology (LBC) of oral brush biopsies for detection of oral cancer.
methodsTwo different preparation techniques were investigated: the conventional transfer procedure to glass slides and the LBC preparation method. The obtainments of epithelial cells were performed five times with a nylon brush and transferred onto five glass slides. Additionally, the brushes, which were normally discarded, were stored in a fixative solution. Conventional slides and respective thin layers from a total of 113 cases were reviewed with both techniques.
resultsThin layers showed excellent morphology on a clear background, which allowed an accurate diagnosis. In contrast, the conventional glass slides showed significantly more blood contamination and cell overlapping. The sensitivity of conventional cytological diagnosis was 96.3%, the specificity archived 90.6%, the positive predictive value was 96.3% and the negative predictive value scored 90.6%. The sensitivity of the cytological diagnosis using thin layers archived 97.5%, the specificity was 68.8%, the positive predictive value revealed 88.76% and negative predictive value was 91.7%.
conclusionOur findings indicate that in oral cytology, LBC may replace other types of wet-fixed preparations using the full amount of collected cells, resulting in enhanced specimen quality archiving comparable values of diagnostic accuracy. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LBC facilitates the cell collection due to simpler handling and less transfer errors by dentists and may improve the overall diagnostic accuracy of oral brush biopsies in future.
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.