ArticleMedical molecular morphology2026
Rapid liquid-based cytology improves carcinoma cell detection in intraoperative effusion cytology.
Article in Medical molecular morphology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the utility of rapid liquid-based cytology with a shortened fixation time for intraoperative effusion cytology compared to conventional smears. Despite widespread use, intraoperative applications of liquid-based cytology are understudied; no quantitative paired comparison of rapid liquid-based cytology and conventional smears under identical constraints has been reported. We therefore tested whether rapid liquid-based cytology enriches diagnostically informative cells during time-limited reads, supporting more reliable reporting. We retrospectively analyzed 67 effusion (17 adenocarcinoma-positive and 50 adenocarcinoma-negative) samples collected between May, 2019 and February, 2024. Smear area, nucleated cell counts per field and slide, atypical cell counts, and atypical cell aggregates were quantified for paired preparations and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Rapid liquid-based cytology yielded a markedly small smear area with significantly high nucleated cell counts per field, and conventional smears yielded high total nucleated cell counts per slide. Rapid liquid-based cytology also revealed significantly high numbers of atypical cells and aggregates. Subgroup analyses based on specimen characteristics (mesothelial-dominant, blood-dominant, and mixed) confirmed that rapid liquid-based cytology yielded high per-field nucleated cell counts in all groups. These results suggest that rapid liquid-based cytology concentrates diagnostic cells into a small standardized smear area, supporting timely reporting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41553418What 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.