Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures
Objective. Obtaining cytological specimens by wire-guided endobiliary brushing at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a convenient way to reach a diagnosis. Sensitivity for malignant disease is generally around 50% and specificity around 100%. The present study was d...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology 2006-05, Vol.41 (5), p.597-603 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 603 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 597 |
container_title | Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Adamsen, Sven Olsen, Marianne Jendresen, Marianne Bille Holck, Susanne Glenthøj, A. |
description | Objective. Obtaining cytological specimens by wire-guided endobiliary brushing at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a convenient way to reach a diagnosis. Sensitivity for malignant disease is generally around 50% and specificity around 100%. The present study was designed to assess the reproducibility of the cytological examination.
Material and methods. Samples were obtained from 55 consecutive patients with biliary duct strictures that eventually turned out to be caused by malignant disease in 41 patients (73%). The cytology specimens were evaluated twice in different random order with an interval of at least 4 months by two pathologists blinded to the final diagnoses. Suitability for diagnosis (suitable, suboptimal or unsuitable) and cytologic diagnosis (benign, atypical, suspicious for malignancy and malignant cells) were registered. Kappa analysis was applied.
Results. Regarding suitability for diagnosis, the two observers reproduced their findings in 84% (kappa 0.76) and 87% (0.59) (p>0.05), while the interobserver variations on the two occasions were 76% and 78% (kappa 0.49 and 0.58, respectively) (p>0.05). Five percent of samples were rated as inadequate for diagnosis in at least one reading; 18% were suboptimal and 62-82% were suitable. The observers reproduced their cytological diagnosis in 77% and 71% (weighted kappa 0.83 and 0.75) (p>0.05), and agreed on the cytological diagnosis in 65% and 73% (weighted kappa 0.65 and 0.75) (p>0.05).
Conclusions. The intra- and interobserver agreement in cytological evaluation of endobiliary brushings from bile duct strictures is generally good. The rates of inadequate and suboptimal samples can probably be reduced by modifications of the brush design. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/00365520500389099 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pasca</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_17712903</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67909608</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-293f3f1358744e9003d897493ec3c83cc014cdecea36b5b02e4f2de94af4032f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE2LFDEQhoMo7rj6A7xILnprrXTSX-pFllUXFrzouUmnKztZMslYSY_Mwf9ulh5ZRNhTQup5X1IPYy8FvBXQwzsA2TZNDU259AMMwyO2EQ3UVddB_5ht7uZVAcQZe5bSLQA0nRqesjPRtrLvQG3Y78swx8l5p-nIJ1rSlk8u7tPxPb8KmXTFdZi5CxkpTgnpgMQPmpzOLobyzs0xRx9vnNGe40H7ZZ1Eu7a5cJO4pbgrtR75vJjMUyZn8kKYnrMnVvuEL07nOfvx-fL7xdfq-tuXq4tP15VRUuWqHqSVVsim75TCoaw190PZRKKRppfGgFBmRoNatlMzQY3K1jMOSlsFsrbynL1Ze_cUfy6Y8rhzyaD3OmBc0th2xV4LfQHFChqKKRHacU9uV9yMAsY75-N_zkvm1al8mXY43ydOkgvw-gToVDRZ0sG4dM91nagHkIX7uHIu2Eg7_SuSn8esjz7S35B86B8f_olvUfu8NZpwvI0LhSL4gS3-AOkbsPs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67909608</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Taylor & Francis Medical Library - CRKN</source><source>Access via Taylor & Francis</source><creator>Adamsen, Sven ; Olsen, Marianne ; Jendresen, Marianne Bille ; Holck, Susanne ; Glenthøj, A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Adamsen, Sven ; Olsen, Marianne ; Jendresen, Marianne Bille ; Holck, Susanne ; Glenthøj, A.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective. Obtaining cytological specimens by wire-guided endobiliary brushing at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a convenient way to reach a diagnosis. Sensitivity for malignant disease is generally around 50% and specificity around 100%. The present study was designed to assess the reproducibility of the cytological examination.
Material and methods. Samples were obtained from 55 consecutive patients with biliary duct strictures that eventually turned out to be caused by malignant disease in 41 patients (73%). The cytology specimens were evaluated twice in different random order with an interval of at least 4 months by two pathologists blinded to the final diagnoses. Suitability for diagnosis (suitable, suboptimal or unsuitable) and cytologic diagnosis (benign, atypical, suspicious for malignancy and malignant cells) were registered. Kappa analysis was applied.
Results. Regarding suitability for diagnosis, the two observers reproduced their findings in 84% (kappa 0.76) and 87% (0.59) (p>0.05), while the interobserver variations on the two occasions were 76% and 78% (kappa 0.49 and 0.58, respectively) (p>0.05). Five percent of samples were rated as inadequate for diagnosis in at least one reading; 18% were suboptimal and 62-82% were suitable. The observers reproduced their cytological diagnosis in 77% and 71% (weighted kappa 0.83 and 0.75) (p>0.05), and agreed on the cytological diagnosis in 65% and 73% (weighted kappa 0.65 and 0.75) (p>0.05).
Conclusions. The intra- and interobserver agreement in cytological evaluation of endobiliary brushings from bile duct strictures is generally good. The rates of inadequate and suboptimal samples can probably be reduced by modifications of the brush design.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0036-5521</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1502-7708</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00365520500389099</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16638704</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SJGRA4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Copenhagen: Informa UK Ltd</publisher><subject>Bile Duct Neoplasms - pathology ; Bile Ducts - pathology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biopsy - methods ; Brush biopsy ; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde ; Cholestasis - pathology ; Cholestasis - therapy ; cytology ; Digestive system ; Duodenum - pathology ; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography ; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Medical sciences ; Observer Variation ; Pancreas - pathology ; Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology ; Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry ; reproducibility ; Reproducibility of Results</subject><ispartof>Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology, 2006-05, Vol.41 (5), p.597-603</ispartof><rights>2006 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted 2006</rights><rights>2006 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-293f3f1358744e9003d897493ec3c83cc014cdecea36b5b02e4f2de94af4032f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-293f3f1358744e9003d897493ec3c83cc014cdecea36b5b02e4f2de94af4032f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00365520500389099$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00365520500389099$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,59647,59753,60436,60542,61221,61256,61402,61437</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=17712903$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16638704$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Adamsen, Sven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Marianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jendresen, Marianne Bille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holck, Susanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Glenthøj, A.</creatorcontrib><title>Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures</title><title>Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology</title><addtitle>Scand J Gastroenterol</addtitle><description>Objective. Obtaining cytological specimens by wire-guided endobiliary brushing at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a convenient way to reach a diagnosis. Sensitivity for malignant disease is generally around 50% and specificity around 100%. The present study was designed to assess the reproducibility of the cytological examination.
Material and methods. Samples were obtained from 55 consecutive patients with biliary duct strictures that eventually turned out to be caused by malignant disease in 41 patients (73%). The cytology specimens were evaluated twice in different random order with an interval of at least 4 months by two pathologists blinded to the final diagnoses. Suitability for diagnosis (suitable, suboptimal or unsuitable) and cytologic diagnosis (benign, atypical, suspicious for malignancy and malignant cells) were registered. Kappa analysis was applied.
Results. Regarding suitability for diagnosis, the two observers reproduced their findings in 84% (kappa 0.76) and 87% (0.59) (p>0.05), while the interobserver variations on the two occasions were 76% and 78% (kappa 0.49 and 0.58, respectively) (p>0.05). Five percent of samples were rated as inadequate for diagnosis in at least one reading; 18% were suboptimal and 62-82% were suitable. The observers reproduced their cytological diagnosis in 77% and 71% (weighted kappa 0.83 and 0.75) (p>0.05), and agreed on the cytological diagnosis in 65% and 73% (weighted kappa 0.65 and 0.75) (p>0.05).
Conclusions. The intra- and interobserver agreement in cytological evaluation of endobiliary brushings from bile duct strictures is generally good. The rates of inadequate and suboptimal samples can probably be reduced by modifications of the brush design.</description><subject>Bile Duct Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Bile Ducts - pathology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biopsy - methods</subject><subject>Brush biopsy</subject><subject>Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde</subject><subject>Cholestasis - pathology</subject><subject>Cholestasis - therapy</subject><subject>cytology</subject><subject>Digestive system</subject><subject>Duodenum - pathology</subject><subject>endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography</subject><subject>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Pancreas - pathology</subject><subject>Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry</subject><subject>reproducibility</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><issn>0036-5521</issn><issn>1502-7708</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE2LFDEQhoMo7rj6A7xILnprrXTSX-pFllUXFrzouUmnKztZMslYSY_Mwf9ulh5ZRNhTQup5X1IPYy8FvBXQwzsA2TZNDU259AMMwyO2EQ3UVddB_5ht7uZVAcQZe5bSLQA0nRqesjPRtrLvQG3Y78swx8l5p-nIJ1rSlk8u7tPxPb8KmXTFdZi5CxkpTgnpgMQPmpzOLobyzs0xRx9vnNGe40H7ZZ1Eu7a5cJO4pbgrtR75vJjMUyZn8kKYnrMnVvuEL07nOfvx-fL7xdfq-tuXq4tP15VRUuWqHqSVVsim75TCoaw190PZRKKRppfGgFBmRoNatlMzQY3K1jMOSlsFsrbynL1Ze_cUfy6Y8rhzyaD3OmBc0th2xV4LfQHFChqKKRHacU9uV9yMAsY75-N_zkvm1al8mXY43ydOkgvw-gToVDRZ0sG4dM91nagHkIX7uHIu2Eg7_SuSn8esjz7S35B86B8f_olvUfu8NZpwvI0LhSL4gS3-AOkbsPs</recordid><startdate>20060501</startdate><enddate>20060501</enddate><creator>Adamsen, Sven</creator><creator>Olsen, Marianne</creator><creator>Jendresen, Marianne Bille</creator><creator>Holck, Susanne</creator><creator>Glenthøj, A.</creator><general>Informa UK Ltd</general><general>Taylor & Francis</general><general>Scandinavian University Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060501</creationdate><title>Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures</title><author>Adamsen, Sven ; Olsen, Marianne ; Jendresen, Marianne Bille ; Holck, Susanne ; Glenthøj, A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c434t-293f3f1358744e9003d897493ec3c83cc014cdecea36b5b02e4f2de94af4032f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Bile Duct Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Bile Ducts - pathology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biopsy - methods</topic><topic>Brush biopsy</topic><topic>Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde</topic><topic>Cholestasis - pathology</topic><topic>Cholestasis - therapy</topic><topic>cytology</topic><topic>Digestive system</topic><topic>Duodenum - pathology</topic><topic>endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography</topic><topic>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Pancreas - pathology</topic><topic>Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry</topic><topic>reproducibility</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Adamsen, Sven</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olsen, Marianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jendresen, Marianne Bille</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holck, Susanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Glenthøj, A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Adamsen, Sven</au><au>Olsen, Marianne</au><au>Jendresen, Marianne Bille</au><au>Holck, Susanne</au><au>Glenthøj, A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures</atitle><jtitle>Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology</jtitle><addtitle>Scand J Gastroenterol</addtitle><date>2006-05-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>597</spage><epage>603</epage><pages>597-603</pages><issn>0036-5521</issn><eissn>1502-7708</eissn><coden>SJGRA4</coden><abstract>Objective. Obtaining cytological specimens by wire-guided endobiliary brushing at the time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a convenient way to reach a diagnosis. Sensitivity for malignant disease is generally around 50% and specificity around 100%. The present study was designed to assess the reproducibility of the cytological examination.
Material and methods. Samples were obtained from 55 consecutive patients with biliary duct strictures that eventually turned out to be caused by malignant disease in 41 patients (73%). The cytology specimens were evaluated twice in different random order with an interval of at least 4 months by two pathologists blinded to the final diagnoses. Suitability for diagnosis (suitable, suboptimal or unsuitable) and cytologic diagnosis (benign, atypical, suspicious for malignancy and malignant cells) were registered. Kappa analysis was applied.
Results. Regarding suitability for diagnosis, the two observers reproduced their findings in 84% (kappa 0.76) and 87% (0.59) (p>0.05), while the interobserver variations on the two occasions were 76% and 78% (kappa 0.49 and 0.58, respectively) (p>0.05). Five percent of samples were rated as inadequate for diagnosis in at least one reading; 18% were suboptimal and 62-82% were suitable. The observers reproduced their cytological diagnosis in 77% and 71% (weighted kappa 0.83 and 0.75) (p>0.05), and agreed on the cytological diagnosis in 65% and 73% (weighted kappa 0.65 and 0.75) (p>0.05).
Conclusions. The intra- and interobserver agreement in cytological evaluation of endobiliary brushings from bile duct strictures is generally good. The rates of inadequate and suboptimal samples can probably be reduced by modifications of the brush design.</abstract><cop>Copenhagen</cop><cop>Oslo</cop><cop>Stockholm</cop><pub>Informa UK Ltd</pub><pmid>16638704</pmid><doi>10.1080/00365520500389099</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0036-5521 |
ispartof | Scandinavian journal of gastroenterology, 2006-05, Vol.41 (5), p.597-603 |
issn | 0036-5521 1502-7708 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pascalfrancis_primary_17712903 |
source | MEDLINE; Taylor & Francis Medical Library - CRKN; Access via Taylor & Francis |
subjects | Bile Duct Neoplasms - pathology Bile Ducts - pathology Biological and medical sciences Biopsy - methods Brush biopsy Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde Cholestasis - pathology Cholestasis - therapy cytology Digestive system Duodenum - pathology endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen Humans Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Medical sciences Observer Variation Pancreas - pathology Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry reproducibility Reproducibility of Results |
title | Endobiliary brush biopsy: Intra- and interobserver variation in cytological evaluation of brushings from bile duct strictures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T01%3A29%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pasca&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Endobiliary%20brush%20biopsy:%20Intra-%20and%20interobserver%20variation%20in%20cytological%20evaluation%20of%20brushings%20from%20bile%20duct%20strictures&rft.jtitle=Scandinavian%20journal%20of%20gastroenterology&rft.au=Adamsen,%20Sven&rft.date=2006-05-01&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=597&rft.epage=603&rft.pages=597-603&rft.issn=0036-5521&rft.eissn=1502-7708&rft.coden=SJGRA4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00365520500389099&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pasca%3E67909608%3C/proquest_pasca%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67909608&rft_id=info:pmid/16638704&rfr_iscdi=true |