ABSTRACT Introduction: The accurate diagnosis of biliary strictures or narrowing of the bile duct is challenging in clinical practice. Differentiating malignant from benign strictures is critical, because these treatments differ considerably. Although noninvasive imaging techniques help identify these strictures, they do not provide definitive tissue diagnosis, making techniques such as brush cytology and forceps biopsy essential. This study aimed to address the dearth of comparative research on the diagnostic efficacy of brush cytology and forceps biopsy in Pakistan. Methods: This single-center observational study was conducted at the Pakistan Kidney and Liver Institute & Research Center (PKLI&RC), Lahore, from March 2019 to January 2023. Patients with clinically and radiologically suspected biliary strictures were included in the study. Both brush cytology and forceps biopsy samples were subjected to cytopathological analysis by blinded pathologists. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were among the key metrics analyzed. Results: The study included 54 patients in the biopsy group and 89 in the brushing group. In terms of diagnostic metrics, the biopsy technique displayed a sensitivity of 65.8%, specificity of 92.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 96.4%, and accuracy rate of 72.2%. For the brushing technique, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and accuracy were 56.7 %, 93.3%, 83.1%, and 62.9%, respectively. Although both methods showed high specificity, the biopsy technique exhibited a slightly better sensitivity and overall accuracy. Conclusion: Our findings underscore the importance of the biopsy method in the accurate diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures, showing marginally superior sensitivity and overall accuracy compared to brush cytology. This knowledge can guide clinicians in Pakistan and similar settings in making informed diagnostic choices to improve patient outcomes.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study did not receive any funding

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Institutional Review Board of PKLI&RC

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors