Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The Catheter Flushing Method Shows a Similar Diagnostic Yield to the Conventional Method in Brushing Cytology for Biliary Strictures
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The Catheter Flushing Method Shows a Similar Diagnostic Yield to the Conventional Method in Brushing Cytology for Biliary Strictures
Do you wish to request the book?
The Catheter Flushing Method Shows a Similar Diagnostic Yield to the Conventional Method in Brushing Cytology for Biliary Strictures
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
The Catheter Flushing Method Shows a Similar Diagnostic Yield to the Conventional Method in Brushing Cytology for Biliary Strictures
2024
Overview
Background/Objectives: Endobiliary brushing is usually performed in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures; however, in this setting, brush cytology is limited by a low diagnostic yield and sensitivity. Here, we compared the catheter flushing method (CFM) with the conventional cytologic method (CCM) in terms of cellularity and diagnostic performance. Methods: Endobiliary brushings were obtained during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) from patients with biliary strictures enrolled at six tertiary hospitals. Additionally, the CFM was performed after brushing. Using liquid-based cytologic preparations of samples, we assessed the diagnostic performance of the CCM using Pap staining and the CFM using methionyl-transfer RNA synthetase 1 (MARS1) immunofluorescence staining. Results: From a total of 399 patients (malignant, 253; benign, 146), 374 CCM samples and 361 CFM samples contained adequate cells, with no significant difference in diagnostic yield (93.7% vs. 90.5%, respectively; p = 0.088). The sensitivity of the CFM (90.3%) was significantly higher than that of the CCM (75.1%; p < 0.001), with no significant difference in accuracy between methods (81.2% vs. 82.6%, respectively; p = 0.608). Conclusions: The diagnostic yield of the CFM was comparable to that of the CCM. Additionally, the diagnostic performance of the CFM was comparable to that of the CCM. These findings indicate that the CFM could be an additional brush cytology method for sample collection in patients with indeterminate biliary strictures. Incorporating both the CCM and CFM might be expected to improve the diagnostic yield of brush cytology in the biliary strictures. Further prospective comparative studies between the CCM and CFM using the same staining method are needed to validate these findings.
Publisher
MDPI AG,MDPI
Subject
