Jeong Won Kim, Dong Wan Seo, Sung-Hoon Moon, Gyungyub Gong
{"title":"液体细胞学在内镜超声引导下细针穿刺评估中的应用:与常规涂片的比较","authors":"Jeong Won Kim, Dong Wan Seo, Sung-Hoon Moon, Gyungyub Gong","doi":"10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p> <b>Background and aim:</b> Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has been introduced in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions, adjacent lymph nodes, and organs. To investigate the usefulness of liquid-based cytology (LBC) in EUS-FNA, we compare the efficacy of the conventional smear (CS) and LBC in EUS-FNA specimens. <b>Methods:</b> Forty-three paired LBC and CS slides were obtained using a split sample protocol. The specimen adequacy and diagnostic values were compared. <b>Results:</b> The adequate cases for diagnosis were 36 (83.7%) in CS and 22 (51.2%) in LBC. Inadequate samples were mostly obtained from lymph nodes: 6 cases in CS and 17 in LBC. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CS and LBC were as follows: 90.5%, 95.5%, and 93.0% in CS, respectively, and 57.1%, 100%, and 79.1% in LBC. The false-negative and false-positive rates were 4.7% and 2.3% in CS, respectively, and 20.9% and 0% in LBC. The overall agreement of CS and LBC for the diagnosis of malignancy was high (κ= 0.616). <b>Conclusions:</b> CS is a more effective and adequate preparation method for use in EUS-FNA-based diagnosis. Considering the split sample protocol of this study, LBC is a comparable diagnostic tool to CS in the evaluation of EUS-FNA specimens.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":92990,"journal":{"name":"Basic and applied pathology","volume":"3 2","pages":"57-62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utility of liquid-based cytology in the evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: Comparison with the conventional smears\",\"authors\":\"Jeong Won Kim, Dong Wan Seo, Sung-Hoon Moon, Gyungyub Gong\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p> <b>Background and aim:</b> Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has been introduced in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions, adjacent lymph nodes, and organs. To investigate the usefulness of liquid-based cytology (LBC) in EUS-FNA, we compare the efficacy of the conventional smear (CS) and LBC in EUS-FNA specimens. <b>Methods:</b> Forty-three paired LBC and CS slides were obtained using a split sample protocol. The specimen adequacy and diagnostic values were compared. <b>Results:</b> The adequate cases for diagnosis were 36 (83.7%) in CS and 22 (51.2%) in LBC. Inadequate samples were mostly obtained from lymph nodes: 6 cases in CS and 17 in LBC. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CS and LBC were as follows: 90.5%, 95.5%, and 93.0% in CS, respectively, and 57.1%, 100%, and 79.1% in LBC. The false-negative and false-positive rates were 4.7% and 2.3% in CS, respectively, and 20.9% and 0% in LBC. The overall agreement of CS and LBC for the diagnosis of malignancy was high (κ= 0.616). <b>Conclusions:</b> CS is a more effective and adequate preparation method for use in EUS-FNA-based diagnosis. Considering the split sample protocol of this study, LBC is a comparable diagnostic tool to CS in the evaluation of EUS-FNA specimens.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":92990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Basic and applied pathology\",\"volume\":\"3 2\",\"pages\":\"57-62\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Basic and applied pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Basic and applied pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-9294.2009.01068.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Utility of liquid-based cytology in the evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: Comparison with the conventional smears
Background and aim: Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has been introduced in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions, adjacent lymph nodes, and organs. To investigate the usefulness of liquid-based cytology (LBC) in EUS-FNA, we compare the efficacy of the conventional smear (CS) and LBC in EUS-FNA specimens. Methods: Forty-three paired LBC and CS slides were obtained using a split sample protocol. The specimen adequacy and diagnostic values were compared. Results: The adequate cases for diagnosis were 36 (83.7%) in CS and 22 (51.2%) in LBC. Inadequate samples were mostly obtained from lymph nodes: 6 cases in CS and 17 in LBC. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of CS and LBC were as follows: 90.5%, 95.5%, and 93.0% in CS, respectively, and 57.1%, 100%, and 79.1% in LBC. The false-negative and false-positive rates were 4.7% and 2.3% in CS, respectively, and 20.9% and 0% in LBC. The overall agreement of CS and LBC for the diagnosis of malignancy was high (κ= 0.616). Conclusions: CS is a more effective and adequate preparation method for use in EUS-FNA-based diagnosis. Considering the split sample protocol of this study, LBC is a comparable diagnostic tool to CS in the evaluation of EUS-FNA specimens.