ReviewDental research journal2024
Accuracy of special histochemical staining methods in diagnosis of oral pathology: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Dental research journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical decision-making and biomedical research heavily rely on imaging techniques to visualize tissue morphology. To examine tissues in detail, it is necessary to use special histochemical stains to enhance contrast. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of these stains in diagnosing oral pathologic specimens. We conducted a search in 8 databases, including EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, Ovid, Cinahl, and Cochrane, up to June 2022. Of 87,393 studies, 41 articles were selected for inclusion in our study. The results revealed that the specificity and sensitivity of the special histochemical stains were 86% with confidence interval (CI) 95%: 80%-90% and 83% with CI 95%: 75%-89%, respectively. Among the stains evaluated, toluidine blue, Papanicolaou, silver stain, Giemsa, Gram, feulgen, and periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) were the most frequently used for the detection of malignancy, premalignant lesions, dysplasia, and candidiasis. The specificity and sensitivity of each stain were analyzed individually, considering the type of specimen. Toluidine blue was the most commonly utilized special histochemical stain, particularly effective, for detecting malignancy, with a specificity of 97% with CI 95%: 88%-99% and sensitivity of 76% with CI 95%: 56%-89%. In conclusion, special histochemical stains are effective in diagnosing oral lesions, exhibiting reasonable specificity and sensitivity, especially in cases of premalignant and malignant lesions. Based on the reviewed articles in our study, the silver stain was identified as highly sensitive, while Giemsa and Papanicolaou stain exhibited the highest specificity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39188398PMC11346618What 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.