The endoscopic diagnosis of XXXX . A cytologic review.

@entity1 @entity5 @entity957 @entity420 @entity356
Cytologic reports were compared to final diagnoses for 1,157 gastroesophageal samples from an eight-year period in order to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic cytology and to determine the significance of a "suspicious" cytologic report. In the subgroup of @entity1 with @entity420 evaluated by paired endoscopic biopsy and cytology, the relative and combined sensitivities of the sampling methods were studied. Cytologic examination was reported as positive or suspicious in 85% of 229 cases of @entity5 . There were three false-positive diagnoses of @entity957 of the esophagus, representing 0.3% of all submitted samples. Suspicious cytologic reports were issued in 5% of all cases. The majority (63%) of @entity1 with a suspicious cytologic report had a final diagnosis of @entity5 , with @entity356 present in almost half of the cases. @entity420 was diagnosed in 168 of the @entity1 . Combined endoscopic biopsy and cytology was more sensitive (96%) than biopsy alone (90%) in making the initial diagnosis. Cytology may be of particular value in the diagnosis of @entity5 when the lesions are small and superficial or where stricture precludes adequate biopsy. Regardless of the biopsy findings, @entity1 with "suspicious" cytologic reports require careful reevaluation since a high percentage of those cases in our series were subsequently verified as having @entity5 .
