Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Jul 26, 2020; 8(14): 3006-3020
Published online Jul 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i14.3006
Published online Jul 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i14.3006
Table 3 Difference in sample inadequacy between liquid-based cytology and smear cytology
| Ref. | Year | Country | No. of patients | Inadequacy, n (%) | LBC type | |
| LBC | SC | |||||
| LeBlanc et al[13] | 2010 | America | 50 | 50 (12.00) | 50 (0.00) | ThinPrep |
| Lee et al[12] | 2011 | Korea | 58 | 58 (34.48) | 58 (13.79) | ThinPrep |
| Yeon et al[10] | 2018 | Korea | 48 | 48 (41.67) | 48 (12.50) | CellprepPlus |
| Chun et al[9] | 2019 | China | 338 | 169 (1.78) | 169 (5.32) | SurePath |
| Zhou et al[7] | 2019 | China | 514 | 514 (2.33) | 514 (4.28) | SurePath |
- Citation: Pan HH, Zhou XX, Zhao F, Chen HY, Zhang Y. Diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology and smear cytology in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: A meta-analysis. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(14): 3006-3020
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v8/i14/3006.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i14.3006