The Korean journal of internal medicine

The Korean Association of Internal Medicine (대한내과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of liquid-based cytology (CellPrepPlus) and conventional smears in pancreaticobiliary disease

  • Yeon, Myeong Ho (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Jeong, Hee Seok (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Hee Seung (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Jang, Jong Soon (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Seungho (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Yoon, Soon Man (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Chae, Hee Bok (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Park, Seon Mee (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Youn, Sei Jin (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Han, Joung-Ho (Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Han, Hye-Suk (Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Ho Chang (Department of Pathology, Chungbuk National University Hospital)
  • Received : 2016.05.25
  • Accepted : 2016.12.17
  • Published : 2018.09.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and brushing cytology are used worldwide to diagnose pancreatic and biliary malignant tumors. Liquid-based cytology (LBC) has been developed and it is currently used to overcome the limitations of conventional smears (CS). In this study, the authors aimed to compare the diagnostic value of the CellPrepPlus (CP; Biodyne) LBC method with CS in samples obtained using EUS-FNA and brushing cytology. Methods: This study prospectively enrolled 75 patients with pancreatic or biliary lesions from June 2012 to October 2013. For cytological analyses, including inadequate specimens, benign and atypical were further classified into benign, and suspicious and malignant were subcategorized as malignant. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were evaluated. Results: In the EUS-FNA based cytological analysis of pancreatic specimens, CP had a sensitivity of 60.7%; specificity, 100%; accuracy, 77.1%; PPV, 100%; and NPV, 64.5%. CS had a sensitivity of 85.7%; specificity, 100%; accuracy, 91.7%; PPV, 100%; and NPV, 83.3%. In the brushing cytology based analysis of biliary specimens, CP had sensitivity of 53.1%; specificity, 100%; accuracy, 54.5%; PPV, 100%; and NPV, 6.3%. CS had a sensitivity of 78.1%; specificity, 100%; accuracy, 78.8%; PPV, 100%; and NPV, 12.5%. Conclusions: Our study found that CP had a lower sensitivity because of low cellularity compared with CS. Therefore, CP (LBC) has a lower diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic EUS-FNA based and biliary brush cytology based analyses compared with CS.

Keywords

References

  1. Lee JK. Screening and diagnosis for pancreatic cancer. Korean J Gastroenterol 2008;51:84-88.
  2. Dong SH. Current treatment outcome of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Korean J Med 2010;79:623-629.
  3. Siddiqui MT, Gokaslan ST, Saboorian MH, Carrick K, Ashfaq R. Comparison of ThinPrep and conventional smears in detecting carcinoma in bile duct brushings. Cancer 2003;99:205-210. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11481
  4. Qin SY, Zhou Y, Li P, Jiang HX. Diagnostic efficacy of cell block immunohistochemistry, smear cytology, and liquid-based cytology in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions: a single-institution experience. PLoS One 2014;9:e108762. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108762
  5. Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, Dhar A, Vlavianos P, Monahan KJ. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:319-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.08.049
  6. Duggan MA, Brasher P, Medlicott SA. ERCP-directed brush cytology prepared by the Thinprep method: test performance and morphology of 149 cases. Cytopathology 2004;15:80-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2303.2004.00129.x
  7. Volmar KE, Vollmer RT, Routbort MJ, Creager AJ. Pancreatic and bile duct brushing cytology in 1000 cases: review of findings and comparison of preparation methods. Cancer 2006;108:231-238. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21842
  8. Mahmoudi N, Enns R, Amar J, AlAli J, Lam E, Telford J. Biliary brush cytology: factors associated with positive yields on biliary brush cytology. World J Gastroenterol 2008;14:569-573. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.14.569
  9. Koh JS, Cho SY, Ha HJ, Kim JS, Shin MS. Cytologic evaluation of CellPrep(R) liquid-based cytology in cervicovaginal, body fluid, and urine specimens: comparison with ThinPrep(R). Korean J Cytopathol 2007;18:29-35.
  10. Lee Y. Liquid-based cytology in gynecologic cytology. Korean J Pathol 2009;43:291-300. https://doi.org/10.4132/KoreanJPathol.2009.43.4.291
  11. Koo JH, Lee SY, Lee HC, et al. CellprepPlus(R) liquid-based smear in sono-guided thyroid fine needle aspiration: a comparison of conventional method and CellprepPlus(R) liquid-based cytology. Korean J Pathol 2011;45:182-187. https://doi.org/10.4132/KoreanJPathol.2011.45.2.182
  12. Lee JK, Choi ER, Jang TH, et al. A prospective comparison of liquid-based cytology and traditional smear cytology in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Acta Cytol 2011;55:401-407. https://doi.org/10.1159/000330811
  13. Jin SY, Lee DW, Kim MS, et al. Utility of bile duct brush cytology in pancreaticobiliary diseases: prospective comparative study of conventional smear and Mono-Prep2(TM) liquid based cytology. Korean J Cytopathol 2006;17:38-45.
  14. Stewart CJ, Mills PR, Carter R, et al. Brush cytology in the assessment of pancreatico-biliary strictures: a review of 406 cases. J Clin Pathol 2001;54:449-455. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.54.6.449
  15. Koo JH, Lee HC, Song HG, et al. Comparison of cytologic evaluation between conventional method and Cellprep-Plus(R) liquid-based cytology in body fluid. Korean J Pathol 2009;43:448-452. https://doi.org/10.4132/KoreanJPathol.2009.43.5.448
  16. Moriarty AT, Schwartz MR, Ducatman BS, et al. A liquid concept: do classic preparations of body cavity fluid perform differently than ThinPrep cases? Observations from the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008;132:1716-1718.
  17. Campion MB, Kipp BR, Humphrey SK, Zhang J, Clayton AC, Henry MR. Improving cellularity and quality of liquid-based cytology slides processed from pancreatobiliary tract brushings. Diagn Cytopathol 2010;38:627-632. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.21255
  18. LeBlanc JK, Emerson RE, Dewitt J, et al. A prospective study comparing rapid assessment of smears and Thin-Prep for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirates. Endoscopy 2010;42:389-394. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1243841
  19. Lee YM, Hwang JY, Son SM, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy between CellprepPlus and ThinPrep liquid-based preparations in effusion cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2014;42:384-390. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.23041

Cited by

  1. Are we ready to develop a tiered scheme for the effusion cytology? A comprehensive review and analysis of the literature vol.47, pp.11, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.24278
  2. Diagnostic yield and agreement on fine-needle specimens from solid pancreatic lesions : comparing the smear technique to liquid-based cytology vol.8, pp.2, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1038-4103
  3. Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions vol.10, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050293
  4. Diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology and smear cytology in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: A meta-analysis vol.8, pp.14, 2018, https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i14.3006
  5. Comparison of EUS-guided conventional smear and liquid-based cytology in pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis vol.8, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1240-0027
  6. A comparative study of two liquid-based preparation methods: membrane-based and sedimentation in fine needle aspiration cytology diagnosis in thyroid nodules vol.18, pp.None, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-1787-1
  7. Optimal number of needle passes during EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions with 22G ProCore needles and different suction techniques: A randomized controlled trial vol.10, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4103/eus-d-20-00147
  8. Comparison of smear cytology with liquid-based cytology in pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis vol.9, pp.14, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v9.i14.3308
  9. Cytohistological Correlation in Pleural Effusions Based on the International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology vol.11, pp.6, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11061126