Architectural aspects of cell-blocks as small biopsies

Comparison of liquid-based cytology and cell blocks prepared from cell remnants for diagnosis of cervical pathology

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is a global public health problem with high mortality. Advances in screening programs for cervical cancer are considered key to eliminate cervical cancer. We aimed to examine the contribution of cell block analysis to the detection of epithelial cell abnormalities in cervical smear samples.

METHODS

A total of 559 patients with suspected cervical pathology were examined, and their samples were analyzed by both liquid-based cytology (LBC) and cell blocks. The biopsy results of 149 out of the 559 patients were obtained.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients who were identified as HSIL by biopsy, only 12 were diagnosed as HSIL by the LBC method, 22 as LSIL, 12 as ASCUS, and 4 as ASC-H (p < 0.001). With the cell block analysis, results for these patients were: 20 HSIL, 17 LSIL, 7 NILM, 4 'unsatisfactory', and 2 ASC cases (p < 0.001). LBC detected only 1 of the 10 patients with biopsy-diagnosed tumors, while 7 of these were defined as HSIL, 1 as ASCUS and 1 as AGC. The results of cell block analysis in patients with biopsy-diagnosed tumors were as follows: 7 HSIL, 1 tumor, 1 ASC and 1 LSIL.

CONCLUSIONS

Cell block analysis might be superior to LBC in terms of diagnostic accuracy in cervical pathologies, particularly in the detection of HSIL. However, both methods were similarly poor in diagnosing tumors. Cell blocks may improve diagnostic accuracy and can be a complementary method to LBC, while having the advantage of revealing histological architecture.

Comparison of small biopsy and cytology specimens: Subtyping of pulmonary adenocarcinoma

Objectives

The aims of this study was to investigate the use of cytologic samples for subclassification of lung adenocarcinoma and the cytologic-histologic correlation in lung adenocarcinoma subtypes using small samples.

Methods and Methods

Cytological characteristics of lung adenocarcinoma subtypes were summarized by a literature review. Cytology samples from 115 patients with lung adenocarcinoma confirmed by small biopsies were classified by subtype. The diagnostic concordance of subtypes between biopsy and cytology samples was assessed.

Results

Among the 115 cases, 62 (53.9%) had acinar predominant pattern, 16 (13.9%) were papillary predominant pattern, 29 (25.2%) had solid predominant pattern, 3 (2.6%) had lepidic predominant pattern, and 5 (4.3%) had micropapillary predominant pattern. All corresponding cytologic samples were classified into five subtypes based on cytomorphology features, with concordance rates of 74.2% (46 patients) in c-acinar subtype, 56.3% (nine patients) in c-papillary subtype, 24.1% (seven patients) in c-solid subtype, 66.7% (two patients) in c-lepidic subtype, and 40% (two patients) in c-micropapillary subtype. Collectively, the cytology and small biopsy concordance rate was approximately 57.4%.

Conclusion

Subtyping of lung adenocarcinoma using cytologic specimens is challenging and the consistency rate varies with the subtype. Acinar predominant tumors have an excellent cytologic-histologic correlation compared to tumors with predominant solid or micropapillary pattern. Evaluating cytomorphologic features of different lung adenocarcinoma subtypes can reduce the false-negative rate of lung adenocarcinoma, particularly for the mild, atypical micropapillary subtype, and improve diagnostic accuracy.

Serous fluid: Metastatic sarcomas, melanoma, and other non-epithelial neoplasms

While most tumors metastatic to the serous membranes are of epithelial origin, cytologists should be aware that non-epithelial neoplasms can also cause malignant effusions including sarcomas, melanomas, germ cell tumors, and, more rarely, brain tumors. The differential diagnosis of a malignant effusion is accordingly broad, especially for the small round blue cell tumors that includes not only mesenchymal tumors, but also non-mesenchymal tumors, such as neuroblastoma and Wilms tumor. Diagnosing non-epithelial malignancies in effusion specimens based entirely upon their cytomorphologic features is difficult because these neoplasms often exhibit considerable morphological overlap and their cytomorphology can differ from the original tumor. As malignant cells have a tendency to round up in body fluids these non-epithelial neoplasms can therefore mimic reactive mesothelial cells and metastatic adenocarcinoma. The use of ancillary studies including immunostaining, FISH, and molecular studies is thus often critical to reach a definitive diagnosis. This review article will be incorporated finally as one of the chapters in CMAS (CytoJournal Monograph/Atlas Series) #2. It is modified slightly from the chapter by the initial authors in the first edition of Diagnostic Cytopathology of Serous Fluids.

CelLock TM: an innovative standardized cell-block preparation procedure

The CelLock™ procedure kit is used to collect and prepare cellular specimens such as fine needle aspirates (FNA), cytology specimens, cultured cells, small tissue biopsies, and samples with scant tissue fragments or cells into a paraffin cell-block. This cell-block can be used for subsequent microtomy and staining using hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), special stains, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and applicable molecular techniques such as in situ hybridization (ISH). CelLock is a standardized method that provides optimal receipt, preservation, preparation, and processing of cell-blocks which, contain virtually all of the submitted specimens and are able to be embedded and sectioned in a reproducible fashion. The specimen contained within the cell-block is preserved such that all the cellular protein and genetic information is available for histological and ancillary testing.

Peritoneal malignant mesothelioma: Slippery like an eel to diagnose on cytology-case series of 3 cases

INTRODUCTION

Peritoneal malignant mesothelioma is an extremely rare tumor and is a difficult diagnosis to be made on cytology alone. We report 3 cases where the cytologic features were misdiagnosed as carcinoma/lymphoma but histopathology and immunohistochemistry (IHC) established the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

CLINICAL DETAILS

Case 1 was a 60-year-old man with multiloculated ascites and omental caking. Peritoneal fluid was reported as malignant on cytology but was misclassified as adenocarcinoma. Case 2, a 45-year-old man with ascites and peritoneal nodularity, radiologically mimicking peritoneal carcinomatosis, was also reported positive for malignancy on ascitic fluid cytology. Fine-needle aspiration (FNAC) from omental fat revealed signet ring cells, thus misleading to cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma. Case 3 was a 63-year-old man with perisplenic mass with extensive omental caking and peritoneal nodularity that was also suspected to be peritoneal carcinomatosis on radiology. FNAC smears from perisplenic mass showed sheets of plasmacytoid cells. On cytology, the differential diagnoses offered were neuroendocrine tumor or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma was established only after IHC on histopathologic sections in all these cases. None of our patients had history of prior asbestos exposure.

CONCLUSION

In such clinical scenarios, with radiology suggesting peritoneal carcinomatosis, the cytologic features need corroboration by IHC/fluorescence in situ hybridization on cell block or biopsy to correctly identify malignant mesothelioma and differentiate it from metastatic carcinomatous deposits and benign mesothelial proliferation.