口腔病变切口活检时缝线牵引产生的伪影。

J Seoane, P Varela-Centelles, J R Ramirez, M A Romero, A De La Cruz
{"title":"口腔病变切口活检时缝线牵引产生的伪影。","authors":"J Seoane,&nbsp;P Varela-Centelles,&nbsp;J R Ramirez,&nbsp;M A Romero,&nbsp;A De La Cruz","doi":"10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this study is to compare the artefacts ascribed to the technique of incisional biopsy using a punch or scalpel and the influence of suture use for traction and delivery of the specimen. A total of 160 samples were obtained from 10 fresh pig tongues by four experienced oral surgeons. Handling artefacts (squeeze artefacts): crush, splits, fragmentation and pseudocysts were assessed. No differences were identified in terms of crush, fragmentation or pseudocysts between samples obtained with a punch or scalpel. Splits were more frequent in those biopsies taken with a scalpel (chi2 = 9.26; P= 0.0023). Artefacts in the punch biopsy group were significantly less than in the group that combined punch and suture traction (P < 0.01). The scalpel and suture traction group showed significantly more artefacts than the group without suture. It is concluded the use of a stitch for traction in small incisional biopsies causes squeeze artefacts, so its use should be restricted to specimen orientation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10694,"journal":{"name":"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences","volume":"27 6","pages":"549-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artefacts produced by suture traction during incisional biopsy of oral lesions.\",\"authors\":\"J Seoane,&nbsp;P Varela-Centelles,&nbsp;J R Ramirez,&nbsp;M A Romero,&nbsp;A De La Cruz\",\"doi\":\"10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this study is to compare the artefacts ascribed to the technique of incisional biopsy using a punch or scalpel and the influence of suture use for traction and delivery of the specimen. A total of 160 samples were obtained from 10 fresh pig tongues by four experienced oral surgeons. Handling artefacts (squeeze artefacts): crush, splits, fragmentation and pseudocysts were assessed. No differences were identified in terms of crush, fragmentation or pseudocysts between samples obtained with a punch or scalpel. Splits were more frequent in those biopsies taken with a scalpel (chi2 = 9.26; P= 0.0023). Artefacts in the punch biopsy group were significantly less than in the group that combined punch and suture traction (P < 0.01). The scalpel and suture traction group showed significantly more artefacts than the group without suture. It is concluded the use of a stitch for traction in small incisional biopsies causes squeeze artefacts, so its use should be restricted to specimen orientation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences\",\"volume\":\"27 6\",\"pages\":\"549-53\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical otolaryngology and allied sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2002.00619.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

本研究的目的是比较使用打孔或手术刀的切口活检技术和使用缝线牵引和递送标本的影响。由4名经验丰富的口腔外科医生从10只新鲜猪舌上采集了160份样本。处理伪影(挤压伪影):评估挤压、分裂、碎裂和假性囊肿。在粉碎、碎裂或假性囊肿方面,用打孔或手术刀获得的样本没有差异。在手术刀活检中,分裂更常见(chi2 = 9.26;P = 0.0023)。穿刺活检组假影明显少于穿刺联合缝合牵引组(P < 0.01)。手术刀加缝合牵引组出现的假物明显多于未缝合组。结论是,在小切口活检中使用针迹牵引会引起挤压伪影,因此它的使用应限于标本定向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Artefacts produced by suture traction during incisional biopsy of oral lesions.

The aim of this study is to compare the artefacts ascribed to the technique of incisional biopsy using a punch or scalpel and the influence of suture use for traction and delivery of the specimen. A total of 160 samples were obtained from 10 fresh pig tongues by four experienced oral surgeons. Handling artefacts (squeeze artefacts): crush, splits, fragmentation and pseudocysts were assessed. No differences were identified in terms of crush, fragmentation or pseudocysts between samples obtained with a punch or scalpel. Splits were more frequent in those biopsies taken with a scalpel (chi2 = 9.26; P= 0.0023). Artefacts in the punch biopsy group were significantly less than in the group that combined punch and suture traction (P < 0.01). The scalpel and suture traction group showed significantly more artefacts than the group without suture. It is concluded the use of a stitch for traction in small incisional biopsies causes squeeze artefacts, so its use should be restricted to specimen orientation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Integrity in medical research and publication. The Epley manoeuvre for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo--a systematic review. Combating bacterial resistance in otorhinolaryngology. 11Beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 expression in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck. Sudden deafness: long-term follow-up and recurrence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1