Cargando…

Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Exfoliative cytology performed on oral brush samples can help dentists to decide, whether a given oral lesion is (pre-) malignant. The use of non-invasive brush biopsies as an auxiliary tool in the diagnosis of oral mucosal lesions has gained renewed interest since improvements in cytolo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Olms, Constanze, Hix, Nathalie, Neumann, Heinrich, Yahiaoui-Doktor, Maryam, Remmerbach, Torsten W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5975412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29843756
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-018-0166-4
_version_ 1783326977252392960
author Olms, Constanze
Hix, Nathalie
Neumann, Heinrich
Yahiaoui-Doktor, Maryam
Remmerbach, Torsten W.
author_facet Olms, Constanze
Hix, Nathalie
Neumann, Heinrich
Yahiaoui-Doktor, Maryam
Remmerbach, Torsten W.
author_sort Olms, Constanze
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Exfoliative cytology performed on oral brush samples can help dentists to decide, whether a given oral lesion is (pre-) malignant. The use of non-invasive brush biopsies as an auxiliary tool in the diagnosis of oral mucosal lesions has gained renewed interest since improvements in cytological techniques such as the development of adjuvant diagnostic tools and liquid-based cell preparation techniques. METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of two different preparation techniques (cell collectors): the conventional transfer procedure to glass slides and the so-called liquid-based cytology preparation method. Cell smears were collected from 10 orally healthy individuals (mean age: 24 years) from the palatine mucosa at two different times (baseline and 4 weeks later). Slides of both techniques were stained by Giemsa (n = 40) and May-Gruenwald Giemsa (n = 40). The statistical analysis was performed with Excel. RESULTS: On specimen analysis, the liquid-based cytology showed statistically significant improvement compared to conventional glass sides (p < 0.001). Thin layers, which were performed by liquid-based cytology showed significantly better results in the parameters (p < 0.001): uniform distribution, cellular overlapping, cellular disformation, mucus, microbial colonies and debris. The conventional glass slides approach showed more cell overlapping and contamination with extraneous material than thin layers, which were performed by Orcellex® Brush cell collectors. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques are diagnostically reliable. The liquid-based method showed an overall improvement on sample preservation, specimen adequacy, visualization of cell morphology and reproducibility. Liquid-based cytology simplifies cell collection due to easier handling and less transfer errors by dentists.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5975412
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59754122018-05-31 Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial Olms, Constanze Hix, Nathalie Neumann, Heinrich Yahiaoui-Doktor, Maryam Remmerbach, Torsten W. Head Face Med Methodology BACKGROUND: Exfoliative cytology performed on oral brush samples can help dentists to decide, whether a given oral lesion is (pre-) malignant. The use of non-invasive brush biopsies as an auxiliary tool in the diagnosis of oral mucosal lesions has gained renewed interest since improvements in cytological techniques such as the development of adjuvant diagnostic tools and liquid-based cell preparation techniques. METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare the quality of two different preparation techniques (cell collectors): the conventional transfer procedure to glass slides and the so-called liquid-based cytology preparation method. Cell smears were collected from 10 orally healthy individuals (mean age: 24 years) from the palatine mucosa at two different times (baseline and 4 weeks later). Slides of both techniques were stained by Giemsa (n = 40) and May-Gruenwald Giemsa (n = 40). The statistical analysis was performed with Excel. RESULTS: On specimen analysis, the liquid-based cytology showed statistically significant improvement compared to conventional glass sides (p < 0.001). Thin layers, which were performed by liquid-based cytology showed significantly better results in the parameters (p < 0.001): uniform distribution, cellular overlapping, cellular disformation, mucus, microbial colonies and debris. The conventional glass slides approach showed more cell overlapping and contamination with extraneous material than thin layers, which were performed by Orcellex® Brush cell collectors. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques are diagnostically reliable. The liquid-based method showed an overall improvement on sample preservation, specimen adequacy, visualization of cell morphology and reproducibility. Liquid-based cytology simplifies cell collection due to easier handling and less transfer errors by dentists. BioMed Central 2018-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5975412/ /pubmed/29843756 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-018-0166-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Methodology
Olms, Constanze
Hix, Nathalie
Neumann, Heinrich
Yahiaoui-Doktor, Maryam
Remmerbach, Torsten W.
Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title_full Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title_short Clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
title_sort clinical comparison of liquid-based and conventional cytology of oral brush biopsies: a randomized controlled trial
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5975412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29843756
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13005-018-0166-4
work_keys_str_mv AT olmsconstanze clinicalcomparisonofliquidbasedandconventionalcytologyoforalbrushbiopsiesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hixnathalie clinicalcomparisonofliquidbasedandconventionalcytologyoforalbrushbiopsiesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT neumannheinrich clinicalcomparisonofliquidbasedandconventionalcytologyoforalbrushbiopsiesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT yahiaouidoktormaryam clinicalcomparisonofliquidbasedandconventionalcytologyoforalbrushbiopsiesarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT remmerbachtorstenw clinicalcomparisonofliquidbasedandconventionalcytologyoforalbrushbiopsiesarandomizedcontrolledtrial