Morphometrical findings among dysplasias of oral, cervical and bronchial regions

Abstract

<p> <span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;">The purpose of this study was to compare among dysplasia of oral, uterine cervix and bronchus. Using a computer cytomorphometry cell measurement program, the study was based on a retrospective review of smear cases diagnosed with dysplasia of oral, bronchial and uterine cervix, from 2002 to 2010. For 50 - 70 cells from each lesion, nuclear (N) and cytoplasm (C) variables were assessed: area (A), diameter (D), irregularity (I), stain brightness and granularity. NA and ND were highest in OSCC and higher according to dysplastic grading. By contrast, CA and CD were lowest in severe dysplasia. The significant difference of N/C ratio was observed among OSCC to inflammation, mild and moderate dysplasias (p < 0.05). The N/C ratios of mild and moderate dysplasias were equal. Brightness and granularity values of OSCC cases were significantly higher than those of another (p < 0.05). About the difference between mild to moderate dysplasias, it was the easiest to detect of the uterine cervix. All severe dysplasias among the 3 regions were easily identified morphometrically. The deficient in the difference between inflammation to mild dysplasia and mild to moderate dysplasia were obtained in the oral mucosal lesion. The results displayed a significant variation in cytomorphometrical values among the 3 regions. N/C values for uterine cervix and bronchus were well distinguished in comparison with oral dysplasias. Screening of mild and moderate dysplasias requires experience which carries out the comprehensive judgment of the color.</span> </p

A systematic scoping review on utility of cytomorphometry in the detection of dysplasia in oral potentially malignant disorders

“…In all, total 844 participants (356 males; 448 females) were investigated. Gender distribution was not mentioned in the studies by Ramaesh et al, 19 Kuyama et al 16 and Archana et al 14 Among the OPMDs, leukoplakia (n = 222) was the most common lesion followed by oral submucous fibrosis (n = 55) and oral lichen planus (n = 10). OSCC (n = 234) was utilized for comparing the observation (positive control-malignancy) where as oral mucosa (n = 317) (negative control-No malignancy/no dysplasia).…”

“…OSCC (n = 234) was utilized for comparing the observation (positive control-malignancy) where as oral mucosa (n = 317) (negative control-No malignancy/no dysplasia). Age of 451 participants were 26 years or above while Kuyama et al, 16 Archana et al, 14 Shaila et al 17 did not mention age of the participants. Histopathology (n = 6) was the most common gold standard utilized for confirmation as well as selection of participants.…”

“…Seven cross sectional studies were published from 2015 to 2018. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] Five were from India and 1 each from Srilanka, Turkey, Japan. Analytical cross section study (n = 6) was most common type of study design.…”

“…All the 7 studies [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] did not mention the number of true positive and false negative cases. 6 studies [14][15][16][18][19][20] did not specify exact nature of clinical lesion or clinical type of leukoplakia except study conducted by Shaila et al 17 Additionally, not all OPMD, tobacco related oral mucosal lesion, OSCC stages (if any) were classified in the same way, and not all the studies specified if such lesions were reported by a standardized (or always the same) examiner to remove observer bias. Only three studies (Bhavasar et al, 16,17 performed cytology confirmation of presence of epithelial dysplasia by two or more cytologists/pathologist, no studies including these two studies have conducted kappa analysis to find degree of agreement.…”

Oral Brush Liquid-Based Cytology: A Study of Concordance between a Cytotechnologist and a Cytopathologist

“…There is conspicuous lack of well-established criteria for cytological diagnosis and grading of oral epithelial dysplasia in contrast to the cervical cytology, and hence there is a common tendency on the part of general CyT to grade oral cytology based on the criteria described for cervical cytology, and this may be misleading on occasions. Hence, there is an urgent need for comparative cytological studies so as to make up for the urgent need of a reliable and dependable cytological grading system exclusively meant for oral cytological specimens based on the basic biology of the disease process [27]. …”