2006
DOI: 10.1590/s0004-28032006000100007
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: -Background -Confirmation of malignancy within biliary strictures is endoscopically challenging. Dilation of strictures has been reported to enhance cytological diagnosis. Aim -To compare brush cytology results before and after biliary stricture dilation. Patients and Methods -Patients with extra-hepatic biliary stricture at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were included in the study. Brushing was performed before and immediately after dilation using a 10 Fr dilating catheter. Cytology samples we… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(7 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, although highly specific, ERCP-directed brush cytology is not very sensitive, due to a high rate of false-negative diagnoses (3,4,(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). Several ways have been proposed to overcome this limitation, such as: the use of a different procedure to prepare the brush samples (8); making more malignant cells available for cytopathologic evaluation by increasing the brushing cellular yielding (2,4,19,20); combining brush cytology with some others techniques (2,6,7,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26). While the first two approaches are mostly ineffective, multimodal sampling can improve the sensitivity, although the simplicity that characterizes the ERCP-directed brush cytology is somehow lost.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, although highly specific, ERCP-directed brush cytology is not very sensitive, due to a high rate of false-negative diagnoses (3,4,(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). Several ways have been proposed to overcome this limitation, such as: the use of a different procedure to prepare the brush samples (8); making more malignant cells available for cytopathologic evaluation by increasing the brushing cellular yielding (2,4,19,20); combining brush cytology with some others techniques (2,6,7,(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26). While the first two approaches are mostly ineffective, multimodal sampling can improve the sensitivity, although the simplicity that characterizes the ERCP-directed brush cytology is somehow lost.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The diagnostic specificity of ERCP and brush cytology is very high but its sensitivity remains low despite modifications in the brush itself, balloon dilatation of the strictures prior to brushing or DNA methylation improves analysis of ERCP brush specimens. [21][22][23][24] In a study by Fukuda et al, when cholangioscopy was carried out in addition to ERCP for evaluation of biliary strictures or filling defects, it increased the diagnostic accuracy from 78% to 93% and sensitivity from 58% to 100% (Fig. 4A-C).…”
Section: Indeterminate Biliary Strictures/filling Defectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cytologic analysis of bile duct tissue provides a more accurate diagnosis than histologic processing of tissue . One study suggested that the sensitivity could be improved by dilating the stricture before bile acquisition, but significant complications have been reported . Repeated brushings will improve the diagnostic yield of biliary cytology .…”
Section: Bile Ductsmentioning
confidence: 99%