Abstract
Currently, the most effective way to control oral cancer is to combine early diagnosis and timely as well as appropriate treatment. Precancerous and cancerous oral lesions may mimic number of benign oral conditions appearing as a white or red spot. Until now, tissue harvesting by scalpel biopsy and subsequent histological examination have been the gold standard for diagnosing premalignant and malignant oral diseases. Identifying additional diagnostic tools would be welcome to improve analysis of any suspicious lesion. The basic requirements for a useful diagnostic technique include the following: easy to use, causes minimal patient discomfort, and collects sufficient material. Ideally, a diagnostic procedure should be neither time-consuming nor complicated and, in addition to high sensitivity, should have the potential for automation. The oral cytology technique is simple, nonaggressive, relatively painless, tolerated well by patients and optimally meets all of these requirements, particularly when it is supplemented by various adjunctive methods like image analysis and molecular probes.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2012. 2012. http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/OralCavityandOropharyngealCancer/DetailedGuide/oral-cavity-and-oropharyngeal-cancer-key-statistics. Accessed 1 Mar 2012.
Mehrotra R, Pandya S, Chaudhary AK, Kumar M, Singh M. Prevalence of oral premalignant and malignant lesions at a tertiary level hospital in Allahabad, India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2008;9:263–6.
Thomson PJ, Hamadah O. Cancerisation within the oral cavity: the use of ‘field mapping biopsies’ in clinical management. Oral Oncol. 2007;43:20–6.
Johnson NW. Orofacial neoplasms: global epidemiology, risk factors and recommendations for research. Int Dent J. 1991;41:365–75.
Pindborg JJ, Reichart PA, Smith CJ, Van Der Waal I. Histological typing of cancer and precancer of the oral mucosa. World Health Organisation. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1997. p. 21–314.
Warnakulasuriya S, Reibel J, Bouquot D, Dabelsteen E. Oral epithelial dysplasia classification systems: predictive value, utility, weaknesses and scope for improvement. J Oral Pathol Med. 2008;37:127–33.
Kujan O, Khattab A, Oliver RJ, Roberts SA, Thakker N, Sloan P. Why oral histopathology suffers inter-observer variability on grading oral epithelial dysplasia: an attempt to understand the sources of variation. Oral Oncol. 2007;43:224–31.
Lee JJ, Hung HC, Cheng SJ, et al. Factors associated with underdiagnosis from incisional biopsy of oral leukoplakic lesions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007;104:217–25.
Holmstrup P, Vedtofte P, Reibel J, Stoltze K. Oral premalignant lesions: is a biopsy reliable? J Oral Pathol Med. 2007;36:262–6.
Driemel O, Kunkel M, Hullmann M, et al. Diagnosis of oral squamous cell carcinoma and its precursor lesions. J German Soc Derm. 2007;5:1095–100.
Moralis A, Kunkel M, Reichert TE, Kosmehl H, Driemel O. Identification of a recurrent oral squamous cell carcinoma by brush cytology. Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2007;11:355–8.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mehrotra, R. (2013). Introduction. In: Mehrotra, R. (eds) Oral Cytology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5221-8_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5221-8_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5220-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5221-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)