Diagnostic Utility of Pleural Fluid Cytology versus Cell Block Technique: A Comparative Study

JNGMC Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.3126/jngmc.v21i1.58301
Subarna Acharya
{"title":"Diagnostic Utility of Pleural Fluid Cytology versus Cell Block Technique: A Comparative Study","authors":"Subarna Acharya","doi":"10.3126/jngmc.v21i1.58301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Categorization between benign and malignant pleural effusions most often create diagnostic dilemma. Categorization often requires clinical findings and morphological evaluation. Diagnostic possibility is increased if cell blocks are performed in addition to conventional cytology smears. This will help the clinicians in both treating the patient and determining the outcome of the disease process.
 Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the smears cytology with cell blocks sections in pleural effusions.
 Methods: This hospital-based cross sectional analytical study was carried out in Department of Pathology in Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj for one year.
 Results: The four criteria scored for each technique were amount of background blood, yield of diagnostic cellular material, degree of cellular degeneration as well as cellular trauma and architectural preservation. More amount of diagnostic material present and appropriate retention of architecture was more in cell block sections compared with smears cytology; whereas cellular degeneration as well as cellular trauma and background blood was less appreciated in cell block sections which scored more than the smears cytology.
 Conclusion: Cell block method especially in clinically, radiologically and cytologically suspected malignant cases should be routinely processed for cell block method.","PeriodicalId":476221,"journal":{"name":"JNGMC","volume":"198 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JNGMC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/jngmc.v21i1.58301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Categorization between benign and malignant pleural effusions most often create diagnostic dilemma. Categorization often requires clinical findings and morphological evaluation. Diagnostic possibility is increased if cell blocks are performed in addition to conventional cytology smears. This will help the clinicians in both treating the patient and determining the outcome of the disease process. Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the smears cytology with cell blocks sections in pleural effusions. Methods: This hospital-based cross sectional analytical study was carried out in Department of Pathology in Nepalgunj Medical College, Nepalgunj for one year. Results: The four criteria scored for each technique were amount of background blood, yield of diagnostic cellular material, degree of cellular degeneration as well as cellular trauma and architectural preservation. More amount of diagnostic material present and appropriate retention of architecture was more in cell block sections compared with smears cytology; whereas cellular degeneration as well as cellular trauma and background blood was less appreciated in cell block sections which scored more than the smears cytology. Conclusion: Cell block method especially in clinically, radiologically and cytologically suspected malignant cases should be routinely processed for cell block method.
胸膜液细胞学与细胞阻断技术的诊断价值比较研究
简介:良性和恶性胸腔积液的分类最常造成诊断困境。分类通常需要临床表现和形态学评估。如果在常规细胞学涂片的基础上进行细胞阻滞检查,诊断的可能性会增加。这将有助于临床医生治疗患者和确定疾病过程的结果。目的:本研究的目的是比较胸膜积液的涂片细胞学和细胞块切片。方法:在尼泊尔医学院病理科进行为期一年的以医院为基础的横断面分析研究。结果:每种技术评分的四个标准是背景血量,诊断细胞物质的产量,细胞变性程度以及细胞创伤和建筑保存。与涂片细胞学相比,细胞块切片中存在更多的诊断材料和适当的结构保留;而在细胞块切片中,细胞变性、细胞创伤和背景血的检测较少,而细胞块切片的评分高于细胞学涂片。 结论:细胞阻断法尤其对临床、影像学及细胞学上怀疑的恶性病例应常规处理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书