• Thorax · Sep 1991

    Comparative Study

    Comparison of the diagnostic yields of disposable and reusable cytology brushes in fibreoptic bronchoscopy.

    • W J Kinnear, M J Wilkinson, P D James, and I D Johnston.
    • Department of Medicine, University Hospital, Nottingham.
    • Thorax. 1991 Sep 1; 46 (9): 667-8.

    AbstractDisposable rake and reusable bristle type cytology brushes have been compared in 50 patients undergoing fibreoptic bronchoscopy for suspected malignancy. Forty seven patients were eventually found to have carcinoma of the bronchus. A diagnosis of malignancy was made from the specimens taken with one or other brush in 34 patients, from the reusable brush in 28, and from the disposable brush in 31. The specimens taken with the two types of brush were of similar quality. The reusable brush is about five times less expensive per procedure but carries a risk of cross contamination and cross infection, and time is needed to clean the brush after each bronchoscopy. The diagnostic yield appears to be at least as good with the disposable brush.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…