Flow cytometry and cytomorphology evaluation of hematologic malignancy in cerebrospinal fluids: comparison with retrospective clinical outcome.
Ann Hematol 2011;
90:827-35. [PMID:
21212952 DOI:
10.1007/s00277-010-1145-4]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2010] [Accepted: 12/17/2010] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
An independent clinical assessment was compared with flow cytometry (FCM) and cytomorphology results obtained on 227 cerebrospinal fluids investigated for hematologic malignancy, in a retrospective longitudinal study with a median observation time of 11 months. A combined method assessment (CMA), defining "positive" a sample if at least one method gave "positive" results, was also tested. Eleven out of 55 screening samples and 53 out of 166 follow-up samples resulted positive at clinical evaluation. FCM and CM were concordant with positive clinical assessment in 68.5% and 51.5% of cases, respectively. According to CMA, 10.5% of samples (resulting false negative by either FCM or cytomorphology) were rescued as true positive. FCM retained significantly higher accuracy than cytomorphology (p=0.0065) and 100% sensitivity when at least 220 leukocytes were acquired. CMA accuracy was higher than FCM accuracy and significantly higher than cytomorphology accuracy in the analysis of all samples (p<0.0001), samples from mature B/T cell neoplasms (p=0.0021), and samples drawn after intrathecal treatment (p=0.0001). When acquiring ≤220 leukocytes, FCM accuracy was poor, and combining cytomorphology added statistically significant diagnostic advantage (p=0.0043). Although FCM is the best diagnostic tool for evaluating CSF, morphology seems helpful especially when clinically positive follow-up samples are nearly acellular.
Collapse