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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |