Diagnostic cytopathology · 2018
Cell block cellularity: A comparison of two fixatives and their impact on cellularity.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Layfield Lester J, Esebua Magda, Ang Jonathan, Alnijoumi Mohammed M, Sohal Harijyot S, Hammer Richard D, Prabhakaran Nitya, Schmidt Robert L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ancillary testing including immunohistochemistry and molecular diagnostics has become an increasingly important component for the evaluation of cytologic specimens. Ancillary testing is important not only for diagnosis but also for predictive and prognostic evaluation. While a number of substrates are appropriate for ancillary testing, cell block specimens are commonly utilized and the success of ancillary testing depends on cell-block cellularity.
METHODS: Forty-six pairs of cases each fixed in both formalin and CytoLyt were each analyzed by two evaluators for overall cellularity. Linear regression was used to assess inter-rater reliability of cell counts for each method. Cellularity scores for each case were obtained by averaging the scores for each rater and cellularity was compared between the methods.
RESULTS: Inter-rater agreement was very good for both methods. The coefficient of determination was 1.0 and 0.99 for the CytoLyt and formalin methods respectively. Cell blocks using the CytoLyt method have lower levels of cellularity than cell blocks performed by the formalin method.
CONCLUSIONS: Cell blocks prepared using a formalin fixative yield significantly greater cellularity than those produced by the CytoLyt method. Formalin fixation appears to optimize cellularity of cell blocks useful for ancillary testing.
METHODS: Forty-six pairs of cases each fixed in both formalin and CytoLyt were each analyzed by two evaluators for overall cellularity. Linear regression was used to assess inter-rater reliability of cell counts for each method. Cellularity scores for each case were obtained by averaging the scores for each rater and cellularity was compared between the methods.
RESULTS: Inter-rater agreement was very good for both methods. The coefficient of determination was 1.0 and 0.99 for the CytoLyt and formalin methods respectively. Cell blocks using the CytoLyt method have lower levels of cellularity than cell blocks performed by the formalin method.
CONCLUSIONS: Cell blocks prepared using a formalin fixative yield significantly greater cellularity than those produced by the CytoLyt method. Formalin fixation appears to optimize cellularity of cell blocks useful for ancillary testing.