Introduction: A method called sediment cytology includes the investigation of smears arranged from the sediment of the biopsy specimen fixatives. The sediment from this fixative is used to prepare smears and provides a potentially rich source for cytological material. Investigation of the fixative sediment and understanding of the cytological picture with pertinent clinical and radiological information permits diagnosis in a few hours. Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of sediment cytology and oral brush cytology compared with histopathological findings in oral leukoplakia (OL) cases. Methods: Cytological smears were obtained from 30 clinically diagnosed OL lesions using 2 techniques: oral cytobrush and 10% formalin fixative sedimentation. Both smears were stained with Papanicolaou. Cytological smear evaluation was conducted with respect to cellularity, cell distribution, cellular clumping, and the presence of blood, debris, inflammatory cells, and microbial colonies. The cytopathological scores for all cases were compared between sediment and brush cytology and correlated with the histopathological diagnosis. For statistical analysis, the κ test and the Wilcoxon matched-pair test were used. Results: The cytobrush technique had a sensitivity of 83.3% for OL cases histopathologically diagnosed as severe dysplasia, while the sediment cytology technique had a sensitivity of 16.6%. For moderate/mild dysplasia cases, the cytobrush technique had a sensitivity of 7.7%, whereas the sediment technique showed no diagnostic sensitivity. Conclusion: Based on the results from the present study, sediment cytology, unlike oral brush cytology, is not a useful screening tool for the preliminary diagnosis of potentially malignant oral lesions.

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.