EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy

Background Several clinical groups consider cytological assessment under EBUS (Endobronchial Ultrasonography)‐ROSE (Rapid Onsite Evaluation) as the golden standard for diagnosis and staging of intrathoracic lesions. On the other hand, some investigators proposed that EBUS‐TBNA (Transbronchial Needle...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diagnostic cytopathology 2023-07, Vol.51 (7), p.423-433
Hauptverfasser: Silav, Zuhal Kuş, Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule, Aydemir, Bülent, Yıldırım, Mehmet
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 433
container_issue 7
container_start_page 423
container_title Diagnostic cytopathology
container_volume 51
creator Silav, Zuhal Kuş
Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule
Aydemir, Bülent
Yıldırım, Mehmet
description Background Several clinical groups consider cytological assessment under EBUS (Endobronchial Ultrasonography)‐ROSE (Rapid Onsite Evaluation) as the golden standard for diagnosis and staging of intrathoracic lesions. On the other hand, some investigators proposed that EBUS‐TBNA (Transbronchial Needle Aspiration) has considerably high false‐negative rates for diagnosis. In this study, we analyzed our patient cohort (n = 152) with intrathoracic lesions and suspected malignancies evaluated by EBUS‐ROSE. Our specific aims were: (i) to determine whether EBUS‐ROSE could provide sufficient pathologic material for diagnosis and staging; (ii) to determine the fidelity of EBUS‐ROSE‐guided initial diagnoses in comparison to paraffin block diagnoses; (iii) to evaluate whether anatomical localization of sampled lymph nodes associate with material adequacy and final diagnoses. Methods NCSS (Number Cruncher Statistical System) 2020 Statistical Software (Utah, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results In EBUS‐ROSE cytological assessment, material adequacy was determined in 50,7% (n = 77) of the cases. Considering the paraffin block pathology as the golden standart, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy rates of EBUS‐ROSE were 90,2%, 93,1%, 94,8%, 87,1%, and 91,4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the final pathology and EBUS cytology results (p > .05) with a non‐random Kappa agreement rate as 82.9%. There were differences in material adequacy and diagnoses according to the localization of sampled lymph node stations. Conclusions EBUS‐ROSE is efficient to decide for the adequacy of the pathological specimen and provides diagnoses with reliable fidelity.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/dc.25133
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2793992330</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2821299186</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3493-9e9fc4f4819fe848294319587027d78e15eb14af33dcba4661a8d066d463f83a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10d1qFDEUwPEgil2r4BNIwBtvZs3HfORc1nX9gELB2uuQTU62KTOTbTJTmTsfQXxEn8TZ3VZB8CoH8uNPwiHkJWdLzph46-xSVFzKR2TBGTQFkxIek4VqqqrgTMIJeZbzDWMMBK-fkhNZA0CpxIL8XL-7uqRfLi7Xv77_2I7BoaN2GmIbt8GaluKdaUczhNhnGj0N_ZDMcB2TscHSFvP-YknPcsacO-yHgxquke727KHSmQFTmAfj8HY0dqKmdwfmgtn2MQ9zDb2fsZ2ekyfetBlf3J-n5OrD-uvqU3F-8fHz6uy8sLIEWQCCt6UvFQePav4MlJJDpRomGtco5BVueGm8lM5uTFnX3CjH6tqVtfRKGnlK3hy7uxRvR8yD7kK22LamxzhmLRqQAEJKNtPX_9CbOKZ-fp0WSnABwFX9N2hTzDmh17sUOpMmzZne70k7qw97mumr--C46dD9gQ-LmUFxBN9Ci9N_Q_r96hj8DXlanVI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2821299186</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Silav, Zuhal Kuş ; Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule ; Aydemir, Bülent ; Yıldırım, Mehmet</creator><creatorcontrib>Silav, Zuhal Kuş ; Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule ; Aydemir, Bülent ; Yıldırım, Mehmet</creatorcontrib><description>Background Several clinical groups consider cytological assessment under EBUS (Endobronchial Ultrasonography)‐ROSE (Rapid Onsite Evaluation) as the golden standard for diagnosis and staging of intrathoracic lesions. On the other hand, some investigators proposed that EBUS‐TBNA (Transbronchial Needle Aspiration) has considerably high false‐negative rates for diagnosis. In this study, we analyzed our patient cohort (n = 152) with intrathoracic lesions and suspected malignancies evaluated by EBUS‐ROSE. Our specific aims were: (i) to determine whether EBUS‐ROSE could provide sufficient pathologic material for diagnosis and staging; (ii) to determine the fidelity of EBUS‐ROSE‐guided initial diagnoses in comparison to paraffin block diagnoses; (iii) to evaluate whether anatomical localization of sampled lymph nodes associate with material adequacy and final diagnoses. Methods NCSS (Number Cruncher Statistical System) 2020 Statistical Software (Utah, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results In EBUS‐ROSE cytological assessment, material adequacy was determined in 50,7% (n = 77) of the cases. Considering the paraffin block pathology as the golden standart, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy rates of EBUS‐ROSE were 90,2%, 93,1%, 94,8%, 87,1%, and 91,4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the final pathology and EBUS cytology results (p &gt; .05) with a non‐random Kappa agreement rate as 82.9%. There were differences in material adequacy and diagnoses according to the localization of sampled lymph node stations. Conclusions EBUS‐ROSE is efficient to decide for the adequacy of the pathological specimen and provides diagnoses with reliable fidelity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 8755-1039</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0339</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/dc.25133</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36999482</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>conventional pathology ; cytology ; EBUS ; Localization ; Pathology ; ROSE</subject><ispartof>Diagnostic cytopathology, 2023-07, Vol.51 (7), p.423-433</ispartof><rights>2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3493-9e9fc4f4819fe848294319587027d78e15eb14af33dcba4661a8d066d463f83a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3493-9e9fc4f4819fe848294319587027d78e15eb14af33dcba4661a8d066d463f83a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7073-5131 ; 0000-0002-3058-3708 ; 0000-0001-8026-1478 ; 0000-0002-6586-8092</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fdc.25133$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fdc.25133$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36999482$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Silav, Zuhal Kuş</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aydemir, Bülent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yıldırım, Mehmet</creatorcontrib><title>EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy</title><title>Diagnostic cytopathology</title><addtitle>Diagn Cytopathol</addtitle><description>Background Several clinical groups consider cytological assessment under EBUS (Endobronchial Ultrasonography)‐ROSE (Rapid Onsite Evaluation) as the golden standard for diagnosis and staging of intrathoracic lesions. On the other hand, some investigators proposed that EBUS‐TBNA (Transbronchial Needle Aspiration) has considerably high false‐negative rates for diagnosis. In this study, we analyzed our patient cohort (n = 152) with intrathoracic lesions and suspected malignancies evaluated by EBUS‐ROSE. Our specific aims were: (i) to determine whether EBUS‐ROSE could provide sufficient pathologic material for diagnosis and staging; (ii) to determine the fidelity of EBUS‐ROSE‐guided initial diagnoses in comparison to paraffin block diagnoses; (iii) to evaluate whether anatomical localization of sampled lymph nodes associate with material adequacy and final diagnoses. Methods NCSS (Number Cruncher Statistical System) 2020 Statistical Software (Utah, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results In EBUS‐ROSE cytological assessment, material adequacy was determined in 50,7% (n = 77) of the cases. Considering the paraffin block pathology as the golden standart, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy rates of EBUS‐ROSE were 90,2%, 93,1%, 94,8%, 87,1%, and 91,4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the final pathology and EBUS cytology results (p &gt; .05) with a non‐random Kappa agreement rate as 82.9%. There were differences in material adequacy and diagnoses according to the localization of sampled lymph node stations. Conclusions EBUS‐ROSE is efficient to decide for the adequacy of the pathological specimen and provides diagnoses with reliable fidelity.</description><subject>conventional pathology</subject><subject>cytology</subject><subject>EBUS</subject><subject>Localization</subject><subject>Pathology</subject><subject>ROSE</subject><issn>8755-1039</issn><issn>1097-0339</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp10d1qFDEUwPEgil2r4BNIwBtvZs3HfORc1nX9gELB2uuQTU62KTOTbTJTmTsfQXxEn8TZ3VZB8CoH8uNPwiHkJWdLzph46-xSVFzKR2TBGTQFkxIek4VqqqrgTMIJeZbzDWMMBK-fkhNZA0CpxIL8XL-7uqRfLi7Xv77_2I7BoaN2GmIbt8GaluKdaUczhNhnGj0N_ZDMcB2TscHSFvP-YknPcsacO-yHgxquke727KHSmQFTmAfj8HY0dqKmdwfmgtn2MQ9zDb2fsZ2ekyfetBlf3J-n5OrD-uvqU3F-8fHz6uy8sLIEWQCCt6UvFQePav4MlJJDpRomGtco5BVueGm8lM5uTFnX3CjH6tqVtfRKGnlK3hy7uxRvR8yD7kK22LamxzhmLRqQAEJKNtPX_9CbOKZ-fp0WSnABwFX9N2hTzDmh17sUOpMmzZne70k7qw97mumr--C46dD9gQ-LmUFxBN9Ci9N_Q_r96hj8DXlanVI</recordid><startdate>202307</startdate><enddate>202307</enddate><creator>Silav, Zuhal Kuş</creator><creator>Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule</creator><creator>Aydemir, Bülent</creator><creator>Yıldırım, Mehmet</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7073-5131</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3058-3708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8026-1478</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6586-8092</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202307</creationdate><title>EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy</title><author>Silav, Zuhal Kuş ; Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule ; Aydemir, Bülent ; Yıldırım, Mehmet</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3493-9e9fc4f4819fe848294319587027d78e15eb14af33dcba4661a8d066d463f83a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>conventional pathology</topic><topic>cytology</topic><topic>EBUS</topic><topic>Localization</topic><topic>Pathology</topic><topic>ROSE</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Silav, Zuhal Kuş</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aydemir, Bülent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yıldırım, Mehmet</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Diagnostic cytopathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Silav, Zuhal Kuş</au><au>Çıkrıkçıoğlu, Makbule</au><au>Aydemir, Bülent</au><au>Yıldırım, Mehmet</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy</atitle><jtitle>Diagnostic cytopathology</jtitle><addtitle>Diagn Cytopathol</addtitle><date>2023-07</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>423</spage><epage>433</epage><pages>423-433</pages><issn>8755-1039</issn><eissn>1097-0339</eissn><abstract>Background Several clinical groups consider cytological assessment under EBUS (Endobronchial Ultrasonography)‐ROSE (Rapid Onsite Evaluation) as the golden standard for diagnosis and staging of intrathoracic lesions. On the other hand, some investigators proposed that EBUS‐TBNA (Transbronchial Needle Aspiration) has considerably high false‐negative rates for diagnosis. In this study, we analyzed our patient cohort (n = 152) with intrathoracic lesions and suspected malignancies evaluated by EBUS‐ROSE. Our specific aims were: (i) to determine whether EBUS‐ROSE could provide sufficient pathologic material for diagnosis and staging; (ii) to determine the fidelity of EBUS‐ROSE‐guided initial diagnoses in comparison to paraffin block diagnoses; (iii) to evaluate whether anatomical localization of sampled lymph nodes associate with material adequacy and final diagnoses. Methods NCSS (Number Cruncher Statistical System) 2020 Statistical Software (Utah, USA) was used for statistical analysis. Results In EBUS‐ROSE cytological assessment, material adequacy was determined in 50,7% (n = 77) of the cases. Considering the paraffin block pathology as the golden standart, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy rates of EBUS‐ROSE were 90,2%, 93,1%, 94,8%, 87,1%, and 91,4%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the final pathology and EBUS cytology results (p &gt; .05) with a non‐random Kappa agreement rate as 82.9%. There were differences in material adequacy and diagnoses according to the localization of sampled lymph node stations. Conclusions EBUS‐ROSE is efficient to decide for the adequacy of the pathological specimen and provides diagnoses with reliable fidelity.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>36999482</pmid><doi>10.1002/dc.25133</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7073-5131</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3058-3708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8026-1478</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6586-8092</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 8755-1039
ispartof Diagnostic cytopathology, 2023-07, Vol.51 (7), p.423-433
issn 8755-1039
1097-0339
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2793992330
source Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects conventional pathology
cytology
EBUS
Localization
Pathology
ROSE
title EBUS ROSE‐guided cytological evaluations of intrathoracic lesions. Assessments of the pathological material adequacy and the diagnostic efficacy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T10%3A33%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=EBUS%20ROSE%E2%80%90guided%20cytological%20evaluations%20of%20intrathoracic%20lesions.%20Assessments%20of%20the%20pathological%20material%20adequacy%20and%20the%20diagnostic%20efficacy&rft.jtitle=Diagnostic%20cytopathology&rft.au=Silav,%20Zuhal%20Ku%C5%9F&rft.date=2023-07&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=423&rft.epage=433&rft.pages=423-433&rft.issn=8755-1039&rft.eissn=1097-0339&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/dc.25133&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2821299186%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2821299186&rft_id=info:pmid/36999482&rfr_iscdi=true