title: Efficacy of oral brush cytology in the evaluation of the oral premalignant and malignant lesions.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  In the present study, oral brush cytology of premalignant and malignant lesions was performed using tooth brush. The cytopathological diagnosis of brush cytology was compared with that of punch biopsy. The reliability of oral brush cytology using tooth brush was assessed in terms of sensitivity and specificity.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 67 patients, 32 premalignant lesions and other 35 frank oral carcinomas, were included in the study. All patients underwent oral brush cytology using a toothbrush followed by punch biopsy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Cytopathology and histopathology of premalignant and malignant lesions were compared using Mann-Whitney U test. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability was calculated using Rank-correlation coefficient.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two in premalignant group and five in malignant group were marked insufficient. 18% of cases were false negatives. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 77%, 100%, 100% and 38%, respectively. Statistical analysis showed P>0.05, suggesting that there is no significant difference between histopathology and brush cytology in assessing both premalignant and malignant lesions. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability were 99.22% and 99.77%, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Brush cytology using a tooth brush is reliable and can be easily performed with less cost and discomfort to the patient. It is useful in those situations when a patient refuses to have a biopsy performed or when medically compromised patients would be exposed to unnecessary surgical risks. It can be used for screening for suspicious oral lesions, and may have applications in resource-challenged areas.
authors.affiliation: Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, SDM College of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Babshet
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Nandimath
authors.forename: Sk
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Pervatikar
authors.forename: Vg
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Naikmasur
references.citation: Oral Oncol. 2004 Sep;40(8):824-8
references.pmid: 15288838
references.citation: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1994 Jan;77(1):95-9
references.pmid: 8108108
references.citation: Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1991 Dec;117(12):1350-5
references.pmid: 1845260
references.citation: J Am Dent Assoc. 1999 Oct;130(10):1445-57
references.pmid: 10570588
references.citation: Indian J Med Sci. 2003 Sep;57(9):400-4
references.pmid: 14515030
references.citation: CA Cancer J Clin. 1995 Jan-Feb;45(1):8-30
references.pmid: 7528632
references.citation: Oral Dis. 1999 Jan;5(1):1-2
references.pmid: 10218033
references.citation: Oral Oncol. 2003 Jul;39(5):470-5
references.pmid: 12747971
references.citation: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008 Aug;106(2):246-53
references.pmid: 18644521
references.citation: Anal Cell Pathol. 2001;22(4):211-21
references.pmid: 11564897
references.citation: Oral Oncol. 2004 Sep;40(8):829-34
references.pmid: 15288839
references.citation: HNO. 2008 Feb;56(2):205-10
references.pmid: 18214406
references.citation: Obstet Gynecol. 1983 May;61(5):609-14
references.pmid: 6835614
references.citation: Acta Cytol. 1986 May-Jun;30(3):251-7
references.pmid: 3459325
references.citation: Diagn Cytopathol. 2010 Jan;38(1):65-80
references.pmid: 19582815
references.citation: J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2003 Sep;21(3):108-12
references.pmid: 14703217
references.citation: Tex Dent J. 2000 Jun;117(6):20-4
references.pmid: 11857852
references.citation: J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003 Jun;61(6):674-7
references.pmid: 12796875