Critical review of biopsy and cytologic examination of oral cancer.
The value of cytologic diagnosis has been highly estimated since Papanicolaou introduced cytologic study into various clinical fields as a diagnostic tool. In this paper the causes of errors in diagnosis, particularly the false negative case which occurs more frequently than false positive cases are critically reviewed. Four false negative cases, including one case subsequently diagnosed as positive by a direct imprint smear taken from its biopsy section, are presented in detail and possible causative factors for misinterpretation discussed and summarized, comparing the results with those previously reported by Watanabe et al (1959) and Watanabe (1968). In the 24 cases reviewed in this article false negative diagnoses were made in 12-5 per cent and in summarizing the results with the previous reports they averaged 14-5 per cent. False negative cases could be reduced by careful attention to the elimination of the causative factors which have been described.
D000328:Adult; D001706:Biopsy; D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000473:pathology; D003581:Cytodiagnosis; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008545:Melanoma / Q000473:pathology; D008875:Middle Aged; D009062:Mouth Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology*; D010157:Palatal Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology; D011230:Precancerous Conditions / Q000473:pathology; D014062:Tongue Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology