Brush cytology and biopsy in the diagnosis of malignancy of gastrointestinal tract – A comparative study
Abstract
Background: Since the introduction of image guided brush cytology in the mid1970s, the utilization of this technique has proliferated. So, currently it is the most frequently performed procedure in interventional radiology. Depending on the site of lesion, the diagnostic yield is 80%-95% and the complication rate is less than 2%.
Material and Methods: It was a cross sectional study conducted in the pathology department, KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Cytology database were searched for all patients undergoing endoscopic guided brush cytology sampling of gastrointestinal lesions during the twenty six month period January 2009 to March 2011. A total of 200 cases identified where endoscopic guided brush cytology of gastrointestinal lesions was done and their cytology slides were retrieved and reviewed.
Results: Cytological diagnosis proved to be effective in confirming the diagnosis as malignancy in 102 patients (56.3%) while 11 cases were reported as suspicious for malignancy, 19 cases (10.5%) were reported as inadequate or not suitable for opinion, 39 cases (21.5%) have been reported has negative for malignancy.
Conclusion: Brush cytology is a safe, easy and rapid method of diagnosing gastric malignancies. It is a useful adjunct in the diagnosis of gastric malignancies and should be considered as a routine method in combination with biopsy. Multiple repeated endoscopies are recommended in cases of positive cytology and negative biopsy to rule out or confirm malignancy.
Downloads
References
2. Mueller PR, vanSonnenberg E. Interventional radiology in the chest and abdomen. N Engl J Med. 1990 May 10;322(19):1364-74. [PubMed]
3. Charboneau JW, Reading CC, Welch TJ. CT and sonographically guided needle biopsy: current techniques and new innovations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990 Jan;154(1):1-10. [PubMed]
4. Xing GS, Geng JC, Han XW, Dai JH, Wu CY. Endobiliary brush cytology during percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage in patients with obstructive jaundice. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2005; 4(1): 98-103. [PubMed]
5. Kaminsky DB. Aspiration biopsy in the context of the new Medicare fiscal policy. Acta Cytol. 1984 May-Jun;28(3):333-6. [PubMed]
6. Young JA, Hughes HE, Lee FD. Evaluation of endoscopic brush and biopsy touch smear cytology and biopsy histology in the diagnosis of carcinoma of the lower oesophagus and cardia. J Clin Pathol. 1980 Sep;33(9):811-4. [PubMed]
7. Witzel L, Halter F, Grétillat PA, Scheurer U, Keller M. Evaluation of specific value of endoscopic biopsies and brush cytology for malignancies of the oesophagus and stomach. Gut. 1976 May;17(5):375-7. [PubMed]
8. Cook IJ, de Carle DJ, Haneman B, Hunt DR, Talley NA, Miller D. The role of brushing cytology in the diagnosis of gastric malignancy. Acta Cytol. 1988 Jul-Aug;32(4):461-4. [PubMed]
9. Yang GC, Alvarez II. Ultrafast Papanicolaou stain. An alternative preparation for fine needle aspiration cytology. Acta Cytol. 1995 Jan-Feb;39(1):55-60. [PubMed]
10. Guidelines of the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology for fine-needle aspiration procedure and reporting. The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology Task Force on Standards of Practice. Mod Pathol. 1997 Jul;10(7):739-47. [PubMed]
11. Vidyavathi K, Harendrakumar ML, Lakshmana Kumar YC. Correlation of endoscopic brush cytology with biopsy in diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal neoplasms. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2008 Oct-Dec;51(4):489-92.
12. Gupta SC, Bisht D, Nigam DK, Singh PA. Fibreoptic endoscopy, endoscopic brush, biopsy imprint cytology and biopsy histology in lesions of upper gastrointestinal tract. Indian J Pathol Microbiol1984;27:229-40.
13. Sharma P, Misra V, Singh PA, Misra SP, Gupta SC. A correlative study of histology and imprint cytology in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal tract malignancies. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 1997 Apr;40(2):139-46.
OAI - Open Archives Initiative
