A comparison of dacron versus flocked nylon swabs for anal cytology specimen collection

• Verfasst von: Gage, Julia C. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Ghosh, Arpita [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Borgonovo, Sylvia [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Follansbee, Stephen [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Wentzensen, Nicolas [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Gravitt, Patti E. [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Grabe, Niels [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Lahrmann, Bernd [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Castle, Philip E. [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: A comparison of dacron versus flocked nylon swabs for anal cytology specimen collection
• Verf.angabe: Julia C. Gage, Arpita Ghosh, Sylvia Borgonovo, Stephen Follansbee, Nicolas Wentzensen, Patti E. Gravitt, Niels Grabe, Bernd Lahrmann, Philip E. Castle
• E-Jahr: 2011
• Jahr: July 22, 2011
• Umfang: 4 S.
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 06.07.2023
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Acta cytologica
• Ort Quelle: Basel : Karger, 1996
• Jahr Quelle: 2011
• Band/Heft Quelle: 55(2011), 4 vom: Juli/Aug., Seite 364-367
• ISSN Quelle: 1938-2650
• DOI: doi:10.1159/000329488
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• K10plus-PPN: 1852081902

Abstract

Objectives: We compared the performance of commonly used Dacron versus flocked nylon swabs for anal cytology. Study Design: From 23 HIV-positive men screened at Kaiser Permanente San Francisco (San Francisco, Calif., USA), 2 anal specimens were collected, 1 with each swab in random order, and placed into liquid cytology medium. Specimens were tested for cellularity by quantifying a genomic DNA (erv-3). The number of cells was assessed from prepared slides by automated image analysis. Performance was compared between swabs using 2-sample t tests and standard crossover trial analysis methods accounting for period effect. Results: Flocked swabs collected slightly more erv-3 cells than Dacron for the first sample although not significantly (p = 0.18) and a similar number of erv-3 cells for the second sample (p = 0.85). Flocked swabs collected slightly more cells per slide than the Dacron swabs at both time periods although this was only significant in the second time period (p = 0.42 and 0.03 for first and second periods, respectively). In crossover trial analysis, flocked swabs outperformed Dacron for cell count per slide based on slide imaging (p = 0.03), but Dacron and flocked swabs performed similarly based on erv-3 quantification (p = 0.14). Conclusions: Further studies should determine whether flocked swabs increase the representation of diagnostically important cells compared to Dacron.