Cargando…

The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of oral malignancy and epithelial dysplasia has traditionally been based upon histopathological evaluation of full thickness biopsy from lesional tissue. As many studies had shown that incisional biopsy could cause progression of the tumors, many alternative methods of coll...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reddy, Sridhar G, Kanala, Surekha, Chigurupati, Anuradha, Kumar, Shamala Ravi, Poosarla, Chandhra Sekhar, Reddy, B Venkata Ramana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519207/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23248464
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.102482
_version_ 1782252642704031744
author Reddy, Sridhar G
Kanala, Surekha
Chigurupati, Anuradha
Kumar, Shamala Ravi
Poosarla, Chandhra Sekhar
Reddy, B Venkata Ramana
author_facet Reddy, Sridhar G
Kanala, Surekha
Chigurupati, Anuradha
Kumar, Shamala Ravi
Poosarla, Chandhra Sekhar
Reddy, B Venkata Ramana
author_sort Reddy, Sridhar G
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of oral malignancy and epithelial dysplasia has traditionally been based upon histopathological evaluation of full thickness biopsy from lesional tissue. As many studies had shown that incisional biopsy could cause progression of the tumors, many alternative methods of collection of samples had been tested. Oral brush biopsy is a transepithelial biopsy where it collects cells from basal cell layer noninvasively. AIM: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of brush biopsy when compared to histopathology in a group of patients with features of potentially malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present study, 60 cases of clinically diagnosed leukoplakia are selected and subjected to histopathology and brush biopsy. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Results showed that of 16 dysplasia cases confirmed by histopathology, only 12 were positively reported in oral brush biopsy. In 44 cases, the reports are same for histopathology and brush biopsy. The sensitivity of oral brush biopsy is 43.5% and specificity is 81.25% with a positive predictive value of 58.3%. Oral brush biopsy with molecular markers like tenascin and keratins can be an accurate diagnostic test.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3519207
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35192072012-12-17 The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study Reddy, Sridhar G Kanala, Surekha Chigurupati, Anuradha Kumar, Shamala Ravi Poosarla, Chandhra Sekhar Reddy, B Venkata Ramana J Oral Maxillofac Pathol Original Article BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of oral malignancy and epithelial dysplasia has traditionally been based upon histopathological evaluation of full thickness biopsy from lesional tissue. As many studies had shown that incisional biopsy could cause progression of the tumors, many alternative methods of collection of samples had been tested. Oral brush biopsy is a transepithelial biopsy where it collects cells from basal cell layer noninvasively. AIM: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of brush biopsy when compared to histopathology in a group of patients with features of potentially malignancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present study, 60 cases of clinically diagnosed leukoplakia are selected and subjected to histopathology and brush biopsy. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Results showed that of 16 dysplasia cases confirmed by histopathology, only 12 were positively reported in oral brush biopsy. In 44 cases, the reports are same for histopathology and brush biopsy. The sensitivity of oral brush biopsy is 43.5% and specificity is 81.25% with a positive predictive value of 58.3%. Oral brush biopsy with molecular markers like tenascin and keratins can be an accurate diagnostic test. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3519207/ /pubmed/23248464 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.102482 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Reddy, Sridhar G
Kanala, Surekha
Chigurupati, Anuradha
Kumar, Shamala Ravi
Poosarla, Chandhra Sekhar
Reddy, B Venkata Ramana
The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title_full The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title_fullStr The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title_full_unstemmed The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title_short The sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: A comparative study
title_sort sensitivity and specificity of computerized brush biopsy and scalpel biopsy in diagnosing oral premalignant lesions: a comparative study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519207/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23248464
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0973-029X.102482
work_keys_str_mv AT reddysridharg thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT kanalasurekha thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT chigurupatianuradha thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT kumarshamalaravi thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT poosarlachandhrasekhar thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT reddybvenkataramana thesensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT reddysridharg sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT kanalasurekha sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT chigurupatianuradha sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT kumarshamalaravi sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT poosarlachandhrasekhar sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy
AT reddybvenkataramana sensitivityandspecificityofcomputerizedbrushbiopsyandscalpelbiopsyindiagnosingoralpremalignantlesionsacomparativestudy