ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2021
Accuracy of brush cytology in biliopancreatic strictures: a single-center cohort study.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic utility of targeted next-generation sequencing in indeterminate pancreaticobiliary cytology and small biopsy specimens: a prospective cohort study.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Clonorchis sinensis and cholangiocarcinoma: molecular mechanisms and biomarker advances.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2026Review
- Implementing Massive Parallel Sequencing into Biliary Samples Obtained through Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Diagnosing Malignant Bile Duct Strictures.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Diagnostic challenges in biliary cytology of biliary inflammatory pseudotumor of the liver: A case report and a review of the literature.Medicine internationalArticle
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
objectiveFalse positive and negative results are associated with biliary tract cell brushing cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The causes are uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of diagnoses made via cell brushing in our center, and to explore the factors influencing diagnosis.
methodsThe clinical data of patients who underwent cell brushing at our center from January 2016 to August 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. These included age, gender, stricture location, thickness of the bile duct wall in the narrow segment, maximum diameter of the biliary duct above the stricture, number of cell brush smears, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, and carcinoembryonic antigen. Positive brush cytology results were compared with results of surgical histology or tumor biopsy as well as with the patient's clinical course.
resultsOf the 48 patients who underwent cell brushing cytology, 27 (56.3%) had positive results. The sensitivity and specificity of biliary duct cell brushing was 79.4%, and 85.7%, respectively. None of the above-mentioned factors were associated with positive cytology brushing results.
conclusionsCell brushing cytology remains a reliable method for diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary malignancies.
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.