Exploring the potential of interdental brush in oral cytology: a pilot study on sampling efficiency

MakaleAçık ErişimScopus SJRQ1
  • SDG 3 · Sağlık ve Kaliteli Yaşam

Özet

Background: With the renewed interest in brush biopsies, particularly for screening oral potentially malignant disorders and cancers, understanding the efficacy of available brush types in oral cytology is crucial. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of interdental brush sampling with commonly used cytology brushes in oral cytology evaluation. Methods: The study design was an observational clinical study. Brush biopsies were collected from the buccal mucosa of 99 healthy volunteers using an Interdental Brush- TePe Original Interdental Brush (TePe, Malmö, Sweden) (Cell sampling-Interdental Brush (CSIB)), Cytobrush Plus GT (Medscand Medical AB, Sweden) (Cell sampling device 1 (CSD1)), and CervexBrush (Rovers, Oss, Netherlands) (Cell sampling device 2 (CSD2)). Samples were evaluated for cellularity, depth of the epithelial layer, and cellular integrity. Results were compared between brush types using the Friedman test, and multiple comparisons were examined using the Dunn test. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: Of the 99 cases, 59.6% were female and 40.4% were male, with a prevalence of smoking and alcohol consumption at 43.4%. The mean age was 24.3 years (± 4.5). There were no significant differences in cellularity between the brush types (p = 0.205). Mild cellularity was observed at rates of 3%, 9.1%, and 9.1% for CSD1, CSIB, and CSD2, respectively. Parabasal/basal layer cells were detected in 1% of samples collected with CSD1 and 4% with CSD2, while CSIB samples contained only superficial/intermediate cells. CSIB produced an inadequate integrity rate of 30.3%, whereas neither CSD2 nor CSD1 yielded samples with inadequate integrity. Conclusions: Interdental brushes may have potential as accessible and practical tools for chairside cytological screening. The CSIB obtained high-cellularity samples; however, it demonstrated low scores in cellular integrity. Future oral cytological studies may explore the modifications in interdental brush design to improve its potential in sampling for cell preservation and integrity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

RDL Kalıcı Bağlantı (PID)
https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/kostu/10286Resmi atıflarda kullanılan kalıcı adres
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06221-wYayıncı resmi DOI adresi
İndeks kayıtları
Kaydın indeks veri tabanlarındaki sayfası (aktarımda alınan kayıt numarasıyla). Erişim, indeksin kendi koşullarına bağlıdır.
Atıflar
Scopus
0
WoS
0
OpenAlex
1
Her kaynağın kendi saydığı toplam atıf; aktarım ve zenginleştirme sırasında alındı.
Tam Kayıt
AlanDeğerDil
dc.contributor.authorÇelebi, Elif
dc.contributor.authorÖçbe, Melisa
dc.contributor.authorSinanoğlu, Enver Alper
dc.contributor.authorTekkeşin, Merva Soluk
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-27T23:47:22.920082367Z
dc.date.available2026-10-27T23:47:22.920082367Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractBackground: With the renewed interest in brush biopsies, particularly for screening oral potentially malignant disorders and cancers, understanding the efficacy of available brush types in oral cytology is crucial. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of interdental brush sampling with commonly used cytology brushes in oral cytology evaluation. Methods: The study design was an observational clinical study. Brush biopsies were collected from the buccal mucosa of 99 healthy volunteers using an Interdental Brush- TePe Original Interdental Brush (TePe, Malmö, Sweden) (Cell sampling-Interdental Brush (CSIB)), Cytobrush Plus GT (Medscand Medical AB, Sweden) (Cell sampling device 1 (CSD1)), and CervexBrush (Rovers, Oss, Netherlands) (Cell sampling device 2 (CSD2)). Samples were evaluated for cellularity, depth of the epithelial layer, and cellular integrity. Results were compared between brush types using the Friedman test, and multiple comparisons were examined using the Dunn test. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: Of the 99 cases, 59.6% were female and 40.4% were male, with a prevalence of smoking and alcohol consumption at 43.4%. The mean age was 24.3 years (± 4.5). There were no significant differences in cellularity between the brush types (p = 0.205). Mild cellularity was observed at rates of 3%, 9.1%, and 9.1% for CSD1, CSIB, and CSD2, respectively. Parabasal/basal layer cells were detected in 1% of samples collected with CSD1 and 4% with CSD2, while CSIB samples contained only superficial/intermediate cells. CSIB produced an inadequate integrity rate of 30.3%, whereas neither CSD2 nor CSD1 yielded samples with inadequate integrity. Conclusions: Interdental brushes may have potential as accessible and practical tools for chairside cytological screening. The CSIB obtained high-cellularity samples; however, it demonstrated low scores in cellular integrity. Future oral cytological studies may explore the modifications in interdental brush design to improve its potential in sampling for cell preservation and integrity.
dc.identifier.articlenumber842
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12903-025-06221-w
dc.identifier.issn1472-6831
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC12121002
dc.identifier.pmid40437465
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105006819786
dc.identifier.urihttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/kostu/10286
dc.identifier.volume25
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001498577900001
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Oral Health
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectCytodiagnosis
dc.subjectExfoliative cytology
dc.subjectOral mucosa
dc.subject.classificationDentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine
dc.subject.otherAdult
dc.subject.otherBiopsy
dc.subject.otherCytodiagnosis
dc.subject.otherFemale
dc.subject.otherHumans
dc.subject.otherMale
dc.subject.otherMouth Mucosa
dc.subject.otherPilot Projects
dc.subject.otherYoung Adult
dc.subject.othercomparative study
dc.subject.othercytology
dc.subject.otherdevices
dc.subject.otherhuman
dc.subject.otherpathology
dc.subject.otherpilot study
dc.titleExploring the potential of interdental brush in oral cytology: a pilot study on sampling efficiency
dc.typeArticle
rdl.citation.openalex1
rdl.citation.scopus0
rdl.citation.wos0
rdl.departmentFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Bahcesehir University, Gayrettepe, Barbaros Blv. No:153, 34357, Istanbul, Turkey
rdl.departmentFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kocaeli Health and Technology University, Kocaeli, Turkey
rdl.departmentFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey
rdl.departmentFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Pathology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey
rdl.oa.statusgold
rdl.oa.statusgreen
rdl.oa.urlhttps://bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12903-025-06221-w
rdl.scopus.quartileQ1
rdl.sdgSDG03
rdl.source.indexSCOPUS
rdl.source.indexWOS
rdl.source.indexPUBMED
rdl.wos.indexScience Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)