Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Costa,Mariana
Publication Date: 2019
Other Authors: Canena,Jorge, Mascarenhas-Lemos,Luís, Loureiro,Rafaela, Silva,Mário, Carvalho,Diana, Capela,Tiago, Russo,Pedro, Ramos,Gonçalo, Mateus-Dias,António, Ferraz-Oliveira,Mário, Veiga,Pedro Mota, Coimbra,João
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003
Summary: Background and Aims: Brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most frequently used strategy for obtaining a tissue sample from an indeterminate biliary stricture. A recent study reported that age is a factor associated with positive yields, but further analysis of how age influences the results was lacking. We aimed to evaluate clinical effectiveness of biliary cytology and prognostic factors for a positive outcome, especially age. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective, clinical study of 77 consecutive patients who underwent brush cytology during ERCP to obtain a diagnosis of an indeterminate biliary stricture. We compared 2 routine cytology techniques: A (smear); B (centrifugation of the cytological material collected and the cut-off brush + cell block when sufficient amount of material was available). The data were collected aiming to compare the accuracy of the different techniques used and the prognostic factors affecting the outcome, with a particular focus on age. The yield for brush cytology was compared with the gold standard defined as either definitive histology or the long-term clinical course. Results: The overall accuracy of the 2 used methods was 75.3%. Sensitivity was 52.5%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, and negative predictive value was 66.1%. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward accuracy for method B compared with method A (80.4 vs. 65.4%; p = 0.153). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that younger age was the only independent prognostic factor associated with a positive diagnosis (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90-0.99; p = 0.039). Receiver operating characteristic curves for age yielded an area under the curve value of 68.2%. On the basis of the Youden index, 69 years was found to be the optimal cutoff for age. Conclusions: In this series, the accuracy of routine biliary brush cytology was not equal for all methods and ages; in particular, younger patients (below 69 years) tended to have a higher probability of a correct diagnosis.
id RCAP_a70a49c3d7cd14b7b2206ad1c3dcf489
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S2341-45452019000100003
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective ReviewBiliary cytologyAgeERCPPredictors of outcomeBackground and Aims: Brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most frequently used strategy for obtaining a tissue sample from an indeterminate biliary stricture. A recent study reported that age is a factor associated with positive yields, but further analysis of how age influences the results was lacking. We aimed to evaluate clinical effectiveness of biliary cytology and prognostic factors for a positive outcome, especially age. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective, clinical study of 77 consecutive patients who underwent brush cytology during ERCP to obtain a diagnosis of an indeterminate biliary stricture. We compared 2 routine cytology techniques: A (smear); B (centrifugation of the cytological material collected and the cut-off brush + cell block when sufficient amount of material was available). The data were collected aiming to compare the accuracy of the different techniques used and the prognostic factors affecting the outcome, with a particular focus on age. The yield for brush cytology was compared with the gold standard defined as either definitive histology or the long-term clinical course. Results: The overall accuracy of the 2 used methods was 75.3%. Sensitivity was 52.5%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, and negative predictive value was 66.1%. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward accuracy for method B compared with method A (80.4 vs. 65.4%; p = 0.153). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that younger age was the only independent prognostic factor associated with a positive diagnosis (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90-0.99; p = 0.039). Receiver operating characteristic curves for age yielded an area under the curve value of 68.2%. On the basis of the Youden index, 69 years was found to be the optimal cutoff for age. Conclusions: In this series, the accuracy of routine biliary brush cytology was not equal for all methods and ages; in particular, younger patients (below 69 years) tended to have a higher probability of a correct diagnosis.Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia2019-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.26 n.1 2019reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAPenghttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003Costa,MarianaCanena,JorgeMascarenhas-Lemos,LuísLoureiro,RafaelaSilva,MárioCarvalho,DianaCapela,TiagoRusso,PedroRamos,GonçaloMateus-Dias,AntónioFerraz-Oliveira,MárioVeiga,Pedro MotaCoimbra,Joãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-02-06T17:33:54Zoai:scielo:S2341-45452019000100003Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-28T13:20:35.408515Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
title Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
spellingShingle Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
Costa,Mariana
Biliary cytology
Age
ERCP
Predictors of outcome
title_short Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
title_full Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
title_fullStr Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
title_sort Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review
author Costa,Mariana
author_facet Costa,Mariana
Canena,Jorge
Mascarenhas-Lemos,Luís
Loureiro,Rafaela
Silva,Mário
Carvalho,Diana
Capela,Tiago
Russo,Pedro
Ramos,Gonçalo
Mateus-Dias,António
Ferraz-Oliveira,Mário
Veiga,Pedro Mota
Coimbra,João
author_role author
author2 Canena,Jorge
Mascarenhas-Lemos,Luís
Loureiro,Rafaela
Silva,Mário
Carvalho,Diana
Capela,Tiago
Russo,Pedro
Ramos,Gonçalo
Mateus-Dias,António
Ferraz-Oliveira,Mário
Veiga,Pedro Mota
Coimbra,João
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Costa,Mariana
Canena,Jorge
Mascarenhas-Lemos,Luís
Loureiro,Rafaela
Silva,Mário
Carvalho,Diana
Capela,Tiago
Russo,Pedro
Ramos,Gonçalo
Mateus-Dias,António
Ferraz-Oliveira,Mário
Veiga,Pedro Mota
Coimbra,João
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Biliary cytology
Age
ERCP
Predictors of outcome
topic Biliary cytology
Age
ERCP
Predictors of outcome
description Background and Aims: Brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most frequently used strategy for obtaining a tissue sample from an indeterminate biliary stricture. A recent study reported that age is a factor associated with positive yields, but further analysis of how age influences the results was lacking. We aimed to evaluate clinical effectiveness of biliary cytology and prognostic factors for a positive outcome, especially age. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective, clinical study of 77 consecutive patients who underwent brush cytology during ERCP to obtain a diagnosis of an indeterminate biliary stricture. We compared 2 routine cytology techniques: A (smear); B (centrifugation of the cytological material collected and the cut-off brush + cell block when sufficient amount of material was available). The data were collected aiming to compare the accuracy of the different techniques used and the prognostic factors affecting the outcome, with a particular focus on age. The yield for brush cytology was compared with the gold standard defined as either definitive histology or the long-term clinical course. Results: The overall accuracy of the 2 used methods was 75.3%. Sensitivity was 52.5%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, and negative predictive value was 66.1%. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward accuracy for method B compared with method A (80.4 vs. 65.4%; p = 0.153). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that younger age was the only independent prognostic factor associated with a positive diagnosis (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90-0.99; p = 0.039). Receiver operating characteristic curves for age yielded an area under the curve value of 68.2%. On the basis of the Youden index, 69 years was found to be the optimal cutoff for age. Conclusions: In this series, the accuracy of routine biliary brush cytology was not equal for all methods and ages; in particular, younger patients (below 69 years) tended to have a higher probability of a correct diagnosis.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-02-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003
url http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2341-45452019000100003
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv GE-Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology v.26 n.1 2019
reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833593683670204416