Comparison between two cell collecting methods for liquid-based brush biopsies: a consecutive and retrospective study

Abstract

Background This study compares two different cell collectors, the Orcellex Brush (rigid brush) and the Cytobrush GT (nylon brush), using liquid-based cytology. A comparison of their obtainment procedures was also considered. The aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy for detection of malignancy in oral brush biopsies. PICO-Statement: In this consecutive and retrospective study we had as population of interests, patients with oral lesions, the intervention was the brush biopsy with two different cell collectors and the control was healthy oral mucosa. The outcome of the study was to compare both cell collectors. Methods From 2009 to 2018, 2018 patients with oral lesions were studied using the nylon brush (666 cases) and rigid brush (1352 cases). In the first cohort five smears per patient were taken with the nylon brush, while each patient received one smear with the rigid brush in the second cohort. These were further processed in a liquid-based procedure. Cytological evaluations were categorised into ‘negative’, which were considered as negative, whereas ‘doubtful’, ‘suspicious’ and ‘positive’ cytological results were overall considered as positive for malignancy in comparison to the final histological diagnoses. Additionally, the clinical expenditure for each collector was estimated. Results 2018 clinically and histologically proven diagnoses were established, including 181 cases of squamous cell carcinomas, 524 lichen, 454 leukoplakias, 34 erythroplakias and 825 other benign lesions. The sensitivity and specificity of the nylon brush was 93.8% (95% CI 91.6–95.5%) and 94.2% (95% CI 91.8–95.5%) respectively, whereas it was 95.6% (95% CI 94.4–96.6%) and 84.9% (95% CI 83.8–87.5%) for the rigid brush. The temporal advantage using the plastic brushes was 4× higher in comparison to the nylon brush. The risk suffering from a malignant oral lesion when the result of the brushes was positive, suspicious, or doubtful was significantly high for both tests (nylon brush OR: 246.3; rigid brush OR: 121.5). Conclusions Both systems have a similar sensitivity, although only the rigid brush achieved a satisfactory specificity. Additional methods, such as DNA image cytometry, should also be considered to improve the specificity. Furthermore, the rigid brush proved to be more effective at taking a sufficient number of cells, whilst also being quicker and presenting less stress for the patient.

A Systematic Review of Oral Biopsies, Sample Types, and Detection Techniques Applied in Relation to Oral Cancer Detection

“…Oral brushing samples are then spun down onto slides and stained using the Feulgen-thionin reaction [ 105 , 106 , 107 ]. Brush biopsies are subsequently stained using PAP staining [ 28 , 36 , 39 , 43 , 104 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 ] or argyrophilic nucleolar organizer region (AgNOR) [ 32 , 107 , 118 , 121 ] for conventional cytology (CC) and liquid-based cytology (LBC). For molecular analysis, mass spectrometry [ 123 , 124 ] and DNA-image cytometry (DNA-ICM) [ 42 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 ] are utilized.…”