기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
요 세포 검사의 진단적 가치; 액상세포검사와 고식적 방법의 비교
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 요 세포 검사의 진단적 가치; 액상세포검사와 고식적 방법의 비교
저자명
이선,박정희,도성임,김윤화,이주희,장성구,박용구,Lee. Sun,Park. Jung-Hee,Do. Sung-Im,Kim. Youn-Wha,Lee. Ju-Hie,Chang. Sung-Gu,Park. Yong-Koo
간행물명
대한세포병리학회지
권/호정보
2007년|18권 2호|pp.119-125 (7 pages)
발행정보
대한세포병리학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Urine cytology is an important screening tool for urinary tract neoplasms. Liquid-based preparation methods, such as $ThinPrep^{(R)}$, have been introduced for non-gynecological samples. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of liquid-based preparations in urine cytology by comparing the results of the conventional Cytospin preparation method for the same samples. A total of 236 cases subject to urine cytology were enrolled in this study from January 2005 to December 2005. All cases were subjected to cystoscopy and if a malignancy was suspected, a biopsy was performed. Urine cytology slides were made using the $ThinPrep^{(R)}$ preparation method and the conventional Cytospin and/or direct smear method from the individual samples. The results of urine cytology were compared with the final cystoscopic or histological diagnoses. We analyzed the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of both cytology preparation methods. A total of 236 slides made using the liquid based method were satisfactory for slide quality, whereas 5 slides (2.1%) prepared by conventional methods were unsatisfactory because of air-drying, a thick smear, or a bloody or inflammatory background. The $ThinPrep^{(R)}$ method showed 53.1% sensitivity, 92.6% specificity, a 92,6% positive predictive value, a 94.1% negative predictive value and 85,6% accuracy, while the conventional method showed 51% sensitivity, 98.4% specificity, a 92.6% positive predictive value, a 98.4% negative predictive value and 88,6% accuracy. Although the diagnostic values were equivalent between the use of the two methods, the quality of the cytology slides and the time consumed during the microscopic examination for a diagnosis were superior for the $ThinPrep^{(R)}$ method than for the conventional method. In conclusion, our limited studies have shown that the use of the liquid based preparation method is beneficial to improve the quality of slides and reduce the duration for a microscopic examination, but did not show better sensitivity, accuracy and predictive values.