ArticleJournal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP
Evaluation of histological artefacts in oral pathology laboratory: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFP. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artefacts are tissue alterations on a prepared microscopic slide due to external factors. Artefacts cause morphological and cytological alterations, which lead to misdiagnosis and result during biopsy procedures, particularly fixation artefacts due to inappropriate use/concentration of fixative agents, followed by artefacts during tissue processing, embedding, staining, sectioning, and poor handling of tissues. The present study aims to assess various histological artefacts encountered in our laboratory over four years. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, oral and maxillofacial histological slides prepared by haematoxylin and eosin staining were collected from the archives of our department from 2021 to 2024. A total of 3793 histopathological slides were evaluated. Two oral and maxillofacial pathologists evaluated the histopathological sections for the presence or absence of various artefacts. The results were tabulated in a Microsoft Excel sheet and were analysed descriptively. Result: The most common defect was folds in the sections, accounting for 34% of all samples (1,317 occurrences), with peaks in the years 2022 (363 cases) and 2023 (396 cases). Crush defects followed, noted in 14% of the samples (554 cases), with a notable rise in 2024 (198 cases). Conclusion: The study found that a large percentage of artefacts in histopathological sections were caused by technical or human faults. Folding artefact, which can cause tissues to become deformed and unclear, was reported to occur most frequently.
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.