Acta cytologica · 2008
Evaluation of staining methods for cytologic diagnosis of oral lesions.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Almeida Janete Dias, Lima Celina Faig, Brandão Adriana Aigotti Haberbeck, Cabral Luiz Antonio Guimarães
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy ofPapanicolaou, hematoxylin-eosin (H-E), Leishman and periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) staining for cytologic diagnosis of oral lesions.
STUDY DESIGN: Patients from the Discipline of Stomatology, São José dos Campos Dental School, from the wards of Hosapital Heliópolis and from the dentistry outpatient clinic of the University Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, with the following diseases, were selected: erythematous candidiasis (n=9), pseudomembranous candidiasis (n=10), squamous cell carcinoma (n=19), herpes simplex (n=8), paracoccidioidomycosis (n=8) and pemphigus vulgaris (n=1).
RESULTS: The different staining methods were compared regarding the quality of definition of cytoplasmic and nuclear morphologic characteristics and the identification of bacteria, fungi, inflammatory cells and secretions. Papanicolaou and H-E staining were considered better methods. In cases of fungal infections, PAS staining is useful and should be applied as a complementary method.
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the cytologic diagnosis of oral lesions along with different staining methods is a useful tool for oral diagnosis.
STUDY DESIGN: Patients from the Discipline of Stomatology, São José dos Campos Dental School, from the wards of Hosapital Heliópolis and from the dentistry outpatient clinic of the University Hospital, University of São Paulo Medical School, with the following diseases, were selected: erythematous candidiasis (n=9), pseudomembranous candidiasis (n=10), squamous cell carcinoma (n=19), herpes simplex (n=8), paracoccidioidomycosis (n=8) and pemphigus vulgaris (n=1).
RESULTS: The different staining methods were compared regarding the quality of definition of cytoplasmic and nuclear morphologic characteristics and the identification of bacteria, fungi, inflammatory cells and secretions. Papanicolaou and H-E staining were considered better methods. In cases of fungal infections, PAS staining is useful and should be applied as a complementary method.
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the cytologic diagnosis of oral lesions along with different staining methods is a useful tool for oral diagnosis.