Literature DB >> 11258695

Cytologic distinctions between clinical groups using curette-probe compared to cytology brush.

R Y Lin1, A Nahal, M Lee, H Menikoff.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We had previously used curette-probe (Rhinoprobe; Arlington Scientific, Springville, UT) to study nasal cytology in various types of patients. Because of the potential sampling ease of using a brush, we sought to compare cytological results obtained with a curette-probe with those obtained using a cytology brush (Cytobrush Plus; Medscand, Malmö, Sweden).
OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of samples of nasal leukocytes obtained with a curette-probe versus a cytology brush to distinguish clinical categories of patients attending an allergy clinic.
METHODS: Adult allergy clinic patients were studied by both curette-probe and cytology brush sampling. Quantitation of eosinophils and total leukocytes was performed on samples. Comparisons of cell quantities for each sampling method were made in patients classified into clinical groups. Patients with rhinitis complaints and abnormalities of nasal mucosal appearance with or without aeroallergy were compared with other patients. The adjustment of leukocyte quantities for the numbers of epithelial cells observed was also analyzed. Sampling methods were also compared for receiver operating characteristics.
RESULTS: Curette-probe sample leukocyte quantities distinguished patients with symptoms of rhinitis (SR) with abnormal nasal appearance from other patients. This between-group distinction was more significant for leukocyte numbers normalized for the number of epithelial cells. SR patients with both abnormal nasal appearance and aeroallergy had significantly more eosinophils and less goblet cells than other patients. Greater than five curette-probe eosinophils were only observed in patients with SR. Brush samples did not show differences between patients stratified in these ways, and eosinophils were observed in patients without SR. Receiver operating characteristics favored curette-probe samples in terms of leukocyte or eosinophil increases characterizing their respective symptomatic patient subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: Curette-probe-obtained nasal samples allow for leukocyte and eosinophil quantitations which characterize rhinitis patients better than brush-obtained samples. Total leukocyte quantitations obtained by curette-probe may represent a marker of inflammatory nasal disease in adults undergoing allergy evaluation and treatment for rhinitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11258695     DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62696-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol        ISSN: 1081-1206            Impact factor:   6.347


  5 in total

1.  Rhinophototherapy in persistent allergic rhinitis.

Authors:  Zsolt Bella; Ágnes Kiricsi; Éva Dósa-Rácz Viharosné; Attila Dallos; Ádám Perényi; Mária Kiss; Andrea Koreck; Lajos Kemény; József Jóri; László Rovó; Edit Kadocsa
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 2.503

2.  Nasal saline irrigation has no effect on normal olfaction: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Jack J Liu; Guy C Chan; Avi S Hecht; Dan R Storm; Greg E Davis
Journal:  Int Forum Allergy Rhinol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.858

3.  The sensitivity of nasal eosinophilia in allergic rhinitis.

Authors:  Murat Cem Miman; Onder Uzun; Iclal Gurses; Irfan Kuku; Orhan Ozturan; Mustafa Akarcay
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-04-28       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Comparison of two nasal cell collection methods in determining cyclic adenosine monophosphate levels and its association with olfaction: A feasibility study.

Authors:  Jack J Liu; Guy C Chan; Avram S Hecht; Daniel R Storm; Greg E Davis
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2014-03-07

5.  Immune Profile of the Nasal Mucosa in Patients with Cutaneous Leishmaniasis.

Authors:  María J Gómez-Zafra; Adriana Navas; Jimena Jojoa; Julieth Murillo; Camila González; María Adelaida Gómez
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 3.609

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.