SynthesisInternational journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics2022
Accuracy of cytological examination of Tao brush endometrial sampling in diagnosing endometrial premalignancy and malignancy.
Synthesis in International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of cytological examination of Tao brush endometrial sampling in diagnosing endometrial premalignancy and malignancy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022Pooled it
- Research Progress of DNA Methylation Markers for Endometrial Carcinoma Diagnosis.Journal of Cancer · 2025Review
- Serum Anti-Mullerian Hormone Levels Might Indicate Premenopausal Endometrial Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Minimally invasive approaches for the early detection of endometrial cancer.Molecular cancer · 2023Review
- Comparison between Laparoscopic and Robotic Approach for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Endometrial Carcinoma Women.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although Tao brush has become one of the most studied and used endometrial cytological samplers, concerns remain about the adequacy of the cytological sample compared with definitive histology. We aimed to assess accuracy of cytological examination from Tao brush sampling in diagnosing endometrial premalignancy and malignancy through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Seven electronic databases were searched from January 2000 to July 2021 for all studies which allowed assessment of accuracy of Tao brush in diagnosing endometrial premalignancy and malignancy. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and area under the curve (AUC) on summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. Five studies with 774 patients were included. In diagnosing endometrial premalignancy and malignancy, cytological examination from Tao brush endometrial sampling showed pooled sensitivity of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.90-0.98), specificity of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.90-0.94), LR+ of 12.73 (95% CI, 3.94-41.18), LR- of 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05-0.18), DOR of 184.84 (95% CI, 24.37-1401.79), AUC of 0.9757 (standard error: 0.013). In conclusion, cytological examination from Tao brush seems to have a high diagnostic accuracy and might be proposed as both screening and diagnostic tool. However, further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.
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.