These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of cytohistologic techniques in diagnosis of gastroesophageal malignancy.
    Author: Batra M, Handa U, Mohan H, Sachdev A.
    Journal: Acta Cytol; 2008; 52(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 18323279.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of various endoscopic cytologic techniques, namely, brushing cytology, touch smear cytology and crush cytology, and comparison with concurrent biopsy results in diagnosis of gastroesophageal malignancy. STUDY DESIGN: This prospective study was conducted on 100 patients, with 78 clinically suspected cases of esophageal malignancy and 22 cases of gastric malignancy. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of touch smear in esophageal malignancy was significantly higher (94.12%) than brushing and crush smears (89.71% each), and endoscopic biopsy had the diagnostic accuracy of 88.24%. The diagnostic accuracy of combined brushing and biopsy was 100%; it was 97.06% for touch smears combined with biopsy. In comparison, the diagnostic accuracy in gastric malignancy was 75% for brushing alone, which was significantly lower than touch smear (87.5%) and endoscopic biopsy (87.5%). The diagnostic yield for crush smear was 81.25%. A combination of touch smears and biopsy had a diagnostic yield of 100%; it was 93.75% for combined brushings and biopsy. CONCLUSION: A combination of cytohistologic techniques resulted in a statistically significant increase in the diagnostic yield of gastroesophageal malignancies and thus cytologic techniques may act as adjunct to biopsy histology to increase the diagnostic efficiency.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]