Sodium Alginate versus Plasma Thrombin Cell Blocks in Diagnostic Cytopathology: A Comparative Analysis

Author:

Gupta Shruti,Gautam Upasana,Susheilia Shaily,Bansal Baneet,Uppal Radha,Srinivasan Radhika

Abstract

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Cell blocks (CBs) are an essential adjunct in cytopathology practice. The aim of this study was to compare 2 techniques of CB preparation – plasma thrombin (PT) method with sodium alginate (SA) method for overall cellularity, morphological preservation, obscuring artefacts, immunocytochemistry (ICC), suitability for molecular analysis, and cost of preparation. <b><i>Design:</i></b> A total of 80 fine-needle aspirates from various sites and serous effusion samples were included. Of these cases, by random selection, 40 each were prepared by PT method and SA methods, respectively. The haematoxylin-eosin-stained sections from the formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded CBs from both methods were evaluated in a blinded fashion by 2 cytopathologists and scored for cellularity, artefacts, and morphological preservation and analysed by χ<sup>2</sup> test with Yates correction. We evaluated 6 cases from each method by ICC for a range of membrane, cytoplasmic and nuclear marker expression. DNA was extracted from four cases to evaluate their utility for molecular analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> CB sections from PT and SA techniques showed comparable cellularity and excellent cytomorphological preservation. Blue gel-like artefacts were common in the SA technique but did not interfere with morphological evaluation. ICC staining results were also similar. DNA yield and utility for PCR were also comparable. The SA-CB cost half that of PT-CB (USD 0.4 vs. USD 1). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> SA technique of CB preparation is an excellent low-cost alternative to PT method for CB preparation.

Publisher

S. Karger AG

Subject

General Medicine,Histology,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Reference11 articles.

1. Jain D, Mathur SR, Iyer VK. Cell blocks in cytopathology: a review of preparative methods, utility in diagnosis and role in ancillary studies. Cytopathology. 2014;25(6):356–71.

2. Saqi A. The state of cell blocks and ancillary testing: past, present, and future. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016;140(12):1318–22.

3. Nambirajan A, Jain D. Cell blocks in cytopathology: an update. Cytopathology. 2018;29(6):505–24.

4. Sano J, Yoshimoto N, Mizoguchi Y, Saito M. Utility of sodium alginate cell block method. J Jpn Soc Clin Cytol. 2005;44(5):291–7.

5. Noda Y, Fujita N, Kobayashi G, Itoh K, Horaguchi J, Takasawa O, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of the cell block method in comparison with smear cytology of tissue samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. J Gastroenterol. 2010;45(8):868–75.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3