2012Journal of Clinical PathologyRequires access

Usefulness of imprint and brushing cytology in diagnosis of lung diseases with flexible bronchoscopy

Guido Michels, T Topalidis, Reinhard Büttner, Marianne Engels, Roman Pfister

Open publisher page 7 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To increase the diagnostic yield in pulmonary diseases, histopathology, imprint cytology and brushing cytology are assessed in combination during flexible bronchoscopy. However, the individual diagnostic discrimination of the three methods is unclear. METHODS: The authors performed the three sampling techniques in 102 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary pathologies and compared the definitive diagnosis with those of histopathology, imprint and brushing cytology for their diagnostic values regarding evidence of malignancy. RESULTS: 33.3% of all histopathological specimens, 31.4% of all imprints and 26.5% of brush biopsy specimens were positive for malignancy. The values for sensitivities were 94% for histopathology, 89% for imprint cytology and 75% for brushing cytology, respectively. Although brushing cytology had limited sensitivity, in two cases a malignant lung tumour was only diagnosed from cytological examination of brushing. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, routine imprint cytology does not increase the diagnostic sensitivity, whereas routine brushing cytology should be used in combination with histopathology to obtain the highest diagnostic rate of yield.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: To increase the diagnostic yield in pulmonary diseases, histopathology, imprint cytology and brushing cytology are assessed in combination during flexible bronchoscopy. However, the individual diagnostic discrimination of the three methods is unclear. METHODS: The authors performed the three sampling techniques in 102 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary pathologies and compared the definitive diagnosis with those of histopathology, imprint and brushing cytology for their diagnostic values regarding evidence of malignancy. RESULTS: 33.3% of all histopathological specimens, 31.4% of all imprints and 26.5% of brush biopsy specimens were positive for malignancy. The values for sensitivities were 94% for histopathology, 89% for imprint cytology and 75% for brushing cytology, respectively. Although brushing cytology had limited sensitivity, in two cases a malignant lung tumour was only diagnosed from cytological examination of brushing. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, routine imprint cytology does not increase the diagnostic sensitivity, whereas routine brushing cytology should be used in combination with histopathology to obtain the highest diagnostic rate of yield.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: To increase the diagnostic yield in pulmonary diseases, histopathology, imprint cytology and brushing cytology are assessed in combination during flexible bronchoscopy. However, the individual diagnostic discrimination of the three methods is unclear. METHODS: The authors performed the three sampling techniques in 102 consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary pathologies and compared the definitive diagnosis with those of histopathology, imprint and brushing cytology for their diagnostic values regarding evidence of malignancy. RESULTS: 33.3% of all histopathological specimens, 31.4% of all imprints and 26.5% of brush biopsy specimens were positive for malignancy. The values for sensitivities were 94% for histopathology, 89% for imprint cytology and 75% for brushing cytology, respectively. Although brushing cytology had limited sensitivity, in two cases a malignant lung tumour was only diagnosed from cytological examination of brushing. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, routine imprint cytology does not increase the diagnostic sensitivity, whereas routine brushing cytology should be used in combination with histopathology to obtain the highest diagnostic rate of yield.

Key concepts: Histopathology, Cytology, Malignancy, Medicine, Biopsy, Bronchoscopy, Pathology, Lung

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Usefulness of imprint and brushing cytology in diagnosis of lung diseases with flexible bronchoscopy — Research Paper | ScholarLens