Details
Category: Volume 06 Issue 03 March 2018
Hits: 1289

Title: Diagnostic Efficiency of Cell Block Method over Conventional Smear Method in the Cytology of Malignant Effusions– A Prospective Study

Authors: Dr Tanya S Ponnatt, Dr Deepthy Vijayaraghavan, Dr Lincy Joseph, Dr C S Sakunthala Bhai

 DOI:  https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v6i3.176

Abstract

Background: Cytological examination of body fluids has increasingly gained acceptance in clinical medicine to such an extent that a positive diagnosis made is often considered definitive diagnosis. It is of utmost importance to identify primary site and type of malignancy. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic efficiency & morphological features of cell block & conventional smear method in malignant fluid samples. This study also evaluates the usefulness of immunohistochemistry on cell blocks in identifying the primary site of malignancy

Methods: Cell blocks & conventional Smears from 30 malignant fluid samples were prepared. Morphological features (like cellularity, nuclear features, cytoplasmic features & pattern) and final diagnosis were compared in both. Immunohistochemistry was performed on cell blocks to identify the primary site of malignancy. The results obtained by immunohistochemistry were compared to the final histopathological diagnosis of the primary malignancy.

Results & Discussion: The morphological features were found to be superior in cell block method compared to conventional smear method. The diagnostic efficiency of cell block was 86.7% whereas that of conventional smear was only 80%. Combined diagnostic efficiency of the two methods was 96.7%. Immunohistochemistry done on cell blocks could identify the primary malignancy or atleast suggest two or three possible sites of primary in all 30 cases.

Conclusions: Cell block in conjunction with smears helps increase the accuracy of fluid diagnosis. The better morphological features and the use of immunohistochemistry to help identify primary site of malignancy gives a more definitive diagnosis by the cell block method.

Keywords: Cell block, Conventional smear, Immunohistochemistry.

References

  1. D, Demirag.F, Bayiz.H, Koyuncu. A, Mutluay.N, Berktas.B, etal., The Cell Block Method increases the diagnostic yield inexudative pleural effusions accompanying lung cancer, Turkish Journal of Pathology 2013;29 (3),165-170.
  2. S, Arakeril.S.U, Karigowdar. M.H, Yelikar.B.R, The role of cell block method in the diagnosis of malignant ascetic fluid effusions, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 2012;6(7),1280-1283
  3. M.B, Santwani.P.M and Vachhani. J.H, Ethiopian Journal of Health Science 2014; 24(2), 125-131
  4. M, Mishra.R.K, Sharma.A, Goyal.V, Goyal.V, Critical analysis of cell block vs smear examination in effusions, Journal of Cytology 2009; 26(2),60-64
  5. A, Bupp P.A, Cytology of serous effusions. An investigation into the usefulness of cell block vs smears. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 1978; 70(6), 855-860
  6. Fagere MO. Diagnostic Utility of AgNORs Staining of Serous Effusion among Sudanese Patients. International Journal of Science and Technology. 2016 Jan;5(1):36-42
  7. Shivakumarswamy U, Arakeri SU, Karigowdar MH, Yelikar B R. Diagnostic utility of the cell block method versus the conventional smear study in pleural fluid cytology.JCytol 2012;29:11-15
  8. Bansode Shubhada ,Kumbalkar , Nayak. Cell Block Technique in the Cytodiagnosis of Body Fluids. International Journal of Science and Research. 2015 July;4(7):87-94
  9. Bodele AK, Parate SN, Wdadekar AA, Bhohate SK, Munshi MM. 2003. Diagnostic Utility of Cell Block Preparation in Reporting of Fluid Cytology. Journal of Cytology 20:133-5
  10. Khan N, Sherwani RK ,Afroz N, Kapoor S .Cytodiagnosis of malignant effusion and determination of primary site. Journal of Cytology. 2005; 22(3):107-110
  11. RichaNathani, Rakesh Singh Hazari, Yogesh G. Patle, Santosh Gupta. Comparative analysis of cavity effusions by cell block and smear examination. International journal of recent trends in science and technology.Aug 2014;12(1):69-72
  12. Santwani PM, Vachhani JH. Analysis of Diagnostic Value of Cytological Smear Method Versus Cell Blocks Method in Body Fluid Cytology: Study of 150 Cases. Ethiopian journal of health sciences. 2014;24(2):125-30.
  13. Foot NC. The identification of neoplastic cells in serous effusions. Am J Pathol. 1939;27:53–60.
  14. Guenther H. Ceelen: The cytologic diagnosis of ascitic fluid. Acta Cytol. 1964; 8:175–185.
  15. Thapar M, Mishra RK, Sharma A, Goyal V. A critical analysis of the cell block versus smear examination in effusions. J Cytol 2009;26:60-64
  16. Zemansky AP. The examination of fluid for tumour cells. An analysis of 113 cases checked against subsequent examination of tissue. Am J M Sci. 1928;175:489504.
  17. Dekker A, Bupp PA. Cytology of serous effusions. An investigation into the usefulness of cellblocks versus smears. Am J Clin Pathol 1978;70(6):855-860
  18. Nithyananda A. Nathan, CFIAC, Eddie Narayan, BAppSci, Mary M. Smith, BS, and Murray J. Horn, MApp Sci. Cell Block Cytology, Improved Preparation and Its Efficacy in Diagnostic Cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 2000;114:599-606 6.
  19. Wojcik EM, Selvaggi SM. Comparison of smears and cell blocks in the fine needle aspiration diagnosis of recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Acta cytologica. 1991;35(6):773-6.
  20. Leung SW, Bedard YC. Methods in Pathology: Simple mini block technique for cytology. Mod Pathol. 1993;6:630–2.
  21. Oyafuso MS, Longatto Filho A, Bortolan J, Rahal P, Bisi H, Lombardo V. Cytological diagnosis of serous effusions in a cancer hospital in Brazil. Pathologica. 1996; 88:128-31
  22. Nair GG, Manjula AA. Comparative study of cell-blocks & routine cytological smears of pleural & peritoneal fluids in suspected cases of malignancy. Indian Journal of Pathology and Oncology. 2015 Apr;2(2):61-8.
  23. Karki S, Jha A, Sayami G. The role of argyrophilic nucleolar organizer región (AgNOR) study in cytological evaluation of fluids, especially for detection of malignancy. Kathmandu University Medical Journal. 2012 Oct 2;10(1):34-9.
  24. Bjorn R, Ben D, Hiep P Dong. Flow cytometricimmunophenotyping of serous effusions and peritoneal washing comparison with immunocytochemistry and morphological findings. J ClinPathol 2000;53:513-7.
  25. Zachon K, Tzartza E, Skenteri A, Orologa A. Ascitic fluid, peritoneal washing and cul de sac aspiration cytology in women under the age of 40: a retrospective study. Cytopathology 2004;15:14-7.
  26. Ghosh I, Dey SK, Das A, Bhattacharjee D, Gangopadhyay S. Cell block cytology in pleural effusion. Journal of the Indian Medical Association. 2012;110(6):390–392. 396. 
  27. Pomjanski N, Juergen Grote H, Doganay P, Schmiemann V, Buckstegge B, Böcking A. Immunocytochemical identification of carcinomas of unknown primary in serous effusions. Diagnostic cytopathology. 2005 Nov 1;33 (5) : 309-15.

Corresponding Author

Dr Deepthy Vijayaraghavan

Phone Number: 9447240310, Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.