BMC surgery · 2017
The utility of the hematoxylin and eosin staining in patients with suspected Hirschsprung disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Setiadi Josephine Amanda, Dwihantoro Andi, Iskandar Kristy, Heriyanto Didik Setyo, Gunadi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: While immunohistochemistry (IHC) methods have been widely conducted for the diagnosis of Hirschsprung disease (HSCR) in developed countries, there are very few studies on their use in developing countries where hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining is a key element of the diagnosis of HSCR. We aimed to determine the accuracy of HE staining in the diagnosis of HSCR using S100 IHC as the reference standard in Indonesia.
METHODS: All histopathology performed for the suspicion of HSCR patients from January 2013 to August 2015 in Dr. Sardjito Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Our study included 23 HSCR patients: 9 males and 14 females. The HE staining revealed 14 negative (absence of ganglion cells) cases (61%) and 9 positive (presence of ganglion cells) cases (39%). In S100 IHC, out of the 9 positive cases by HE staining, 6 (67%) were confirmed for having ganglion cells; and out of the 14 negative cases by HE staining, 12 (86%) were reported negative and 2 (14%) were positive by S100 IHC staining. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy rates of the HE staining were 80% (95% CI: 0.51-0.95), 75% (95% CI: 0.36-0.96), 85.7% (95% CI: 0.56-0.98), 66.7% (95% CI: 0.31-0.91), and 78.3% (95% CI: 0.58-0.90), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that HE staining has relatively moderate accuracy for the diagnosis of HSCR. The use of HE staining is still recommended for the diagnosis of HSCR given the limitation of resource allocation for more expensive IHC technologies in developing countries.
METHODS: All histopathology performed for the suspicion of HSCR patients from January 2013 to August 2015 in Dr. Sardjito Hospital, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Our study included 23 HSCR patients: 9 males and 14 females. The HE staining revealed 14 negative (absence of ganglion cells) cases (61%) and 9 positive (presence of ganglion cells) cases (39%). In S100 IHC, out of the 9 positive cases by HE staining, 6 (67%) were confirmed for having ganglion cells; and out of the 14 negative cases by HE staining, 12 (86%) were reported negative and 2 (14%) were positive by S100 IHC staining. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy rates of the HE staining were 80% (95% CI: 0.51-0.95), 75% (95% CI: 0.36-0.96), 85.7% (95% CI: 0.56-0.98), 66.7% (95% CI: 0.31-0.91), and 78.3% (95% CI: 0.58-0.90), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that HE staining has relatively moderate accuracy for the diagnosis of HSCR. The use of HE staining is still recommended for the diagnosis of HSCR given the limitation of resource allocation for more expensive IHC technologies in developing countries.