Comparison of conventional and novel rotational FNA needles using conventional microscopy and image analysis to quantitatively assess yield

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Mohammed Amer Swid MD, Alivia E. Shen, Amanda J. Young MS, Tariq Rahman MD, Sara E. Monaco MD
{"title":"Comparison of conventional and novel rotational FNA needles using conventional microscopy and image analysis to quantitatively assess yield","authors":"Mohammed Amer Swid MD,&nbsp;Alivia E. Shen,&nbsp;Amanda J. Young MS,&nbsp;Tariq Rahman MD,&nbsp;Sara E. Monaco MD","doi":"10.1002/cncy.70014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>There is increasing interest in designing new fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles to maximize tissue acquisition. This study compares cytological preparations from a new rotating FNA needle (CytoCore) with conventional FNA (ConvFNA) using semiquantitative evaluation and quantitative image analysis (IA).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>FNA were performed on ex vivo tissue in quadruplicate for each needle type (ConvFNA and CytoCore), including different sizes (22 G and 25 G) and variable procedure time (5 and 20 s). The Nikon Elements (v5.41.02) was used to quantify the cellularity and size of the largest tissue fragment on cell blocks.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 96 cytology specimens were evaluated were evaluated from benign and malignant specimens. For both ConvFNA and CytoCore, a longer procedure time (20 s) tended to produce greater cellularity and larger tissue fragments in the cell block specimens for both needles when analyzed with image analysis and was statistically significant for the CytoCore needle (<i>p</i> &lt; .01). The ConvFNA tended to perform better with short procedure time. There was no statistically significant difference using different needle gauges.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study shows that IA can help to quantitatively evaluate sample cellularity in the cell blocks from specimens acquired with different needles. A longer procedure time tended to produce more cellular samples and larger tissue fragments in the cell block for both ConvFNA and CytoCore needles and was statistically significant for CytoCore. Additional larger studies, including those with true clinical cases, should be considered to evaluate the different needle types further.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":9410,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Cytopathology","volume":"133 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Cytopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncy.70014","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is increasing interest in designing new fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles to maximize tissue acquisition. This study compares cytological preparations from a new rotating FNA needle (CytoCore) with conventional FNA (ConvFNA) using semiquantitative evaluation and quantitative image analysis (IA).

Methods

FNA were performed on ex vivo tissue in quadruplicate for each needle type (ConvFNA and CytoCore), including different sizes (22 G and 25 G) and variable procedure time (5 and 20 s). The Nikon Elements (v5.41.02) was used to quantify the cellularity and size of the largest tissue fragment on cell blocks.

Results

A total of 96 cytology specimens were evaluated were evaluated from benign and malignant specimens. For both ConvFNA and CytoCore, a longer procedure time (20 s) tended to produce greater cellularity and larger tissue fragments in the cell block specimens for both needles when analyzed with image analysis and was statistically significant for the CytoCore needle (p < .01). The ConvFNA tended to perform better with short procedure time. There was no statistically significant difference using different needle gauges.

Conclusion

This study shows that IA can help to quantitatively evaluate sample cellularity in the cell blocks from specimens acquired with different needles. A longer procedure time tended to produce more cellular samples and larger tissue fragments in the cell block for both ConvFNA and CytoCore needles and was statistically significant for CytoCore. Additional larger studies, including those with true clinical cases, should be considered to evaluate the different needle types further.

比较传统和新型旋转FNA针使用常规显微镜和图像分析定量评估收率
设计新的细针抽吸(FNA)针以最大限度地获取组织的兴趣越来越大。本研究使用半定量评价和定量图像分析(IA)比较了新型旋转FNA针(CytoCore)和传统FNA (ConvFNA)的细胞学制备。方法采用不同针型(ConvFNA和CytoCore)对离体组织进行不同针型(22 G和25 G)和不同针型(5 s和20 s)的四份FNA,使用Nikon Elements (v5.41.02)定量细胞块上最大组织片段的细胞密度和大小。结果共对96份细胞学标本进行了良性和恶性评价。对于ConvFNA和CytoCore,较长的操作时间(20 s)在两种针的细胞块标本中倾向于产生更大的细胞和更大的组织片段,并且在CytoCore针中具有统计学意义(p <;. 01)。在较短的手术时间内,ConvFNA往往表现较好。使用不同的针规,差异无统计学意义。结论本研究表明,IA可以定量评价不同针法获得的细胞块的细胞结构。对于ConvFNA和CytoCore针,较长的操作时间倾向于在细胞块中产生更多的细胞样本和更大的组织片段,并且在CytoCore针中具有统计学意义。应该考虑其他更大规模的研究,包括那些有真实临床病例的研究,以进一步评估不同类型的针头。
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
Cancer Cytopathology
Cancer Cytopathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
17.60%
发文量
130
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Cytopathology provides a unique forum for interaction and dissemination of original research and educational information relevant to the practice of cytopathology and its related oncologic disciplines. The journal strives to have a positive effect on cancer prevention, early detection, diagnosis, and cure by the publication of high-quality content. The mission of Cancer Cytopathology is to present and inform readers of new applications, technological advances, cutting-edge research, novel applications of molecular techniques, and relevant review articles related to cytopathology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信