Cytologic features of the endometrial adenocarcinoma: Comparison of ThinPrep and BD surepath preparations

Norimatsu, Yoshiaki; Sakamoto, Shingo; Ohsaki, Hiroyuki; Ozaki, Satoru; Yokoyama, Tetsuo; Shimizu, Keiko; Yanoh, Kenji; Akiyama, Minoru; Bamba, Masamichi; Kobayashi, Tadao K.

doi:10.1002/dc.22921

Cited by 29 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, cytopathologist should be cautious in interpreting LBC results if this is the only methodology employed. Several morphological differences were shown and observed among LBCPREP2™, ThinPrep™, and SurePath™ preparations which reflect different sampling devices, collection media, and processing techniques 17, 36, 40. However, all the LBC methods have common and excellent findings such as reduced incidence of air‐drying artifacts, cleaner background, even distribution of cells over a smaller slide area, and increased cellularity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic value of liquid‐based cytology with fine needle aspiration specimens for cervical lymphadenopathy

Bandoh

Goto

Akahane

et al. 2016

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCervical lymphadenopathy is a symptom that is frequently seen among outpatients, and it is important to differentiate malignant lesions from reactive lymphoid hyperplasia. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology has been widely used for the diagnosis of cervical lymphadenopathy. However, some limitations of the diagnostic accuracy using conventional smear (CS) cytology have been pointed out. The diagnostic value of liquid‐based cytology (LBC) with FNA specimens has not yet been fully proven.MethodsForty‐two patients with cervical lymphadenopathy who underwent FNA with CS cytology from 2007 to 2011 and 123 patients who underwent FNA with LBC utilizing LBCPREP2™ from 2011 to 2015 were studied. Diagnostic values were compared between the CS and the LBC groups.ResultsOf the total 165 patients representing the combined CS and LBC groups, 81 (49.1%) were diagnosed as benign lymph node and 84 (50.9%) were malignant diseases including 37 (22.4%) of metastatic carcinoma except for thyroid carcinoma, 30 (18.2%) of metastatic thyroid carcinoma, and 17 (10.3%) of malignant lymphoma. The overall statistical values including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the CS were 75%, 100%, 100%, 78.9%, and 87.1%, respectively, whereas those values for LBC were 91.2%, 100%, 100%, 90.7%, and 95.3%, respectively. The sensitivity of LBC for malignant diseases tended to be higher than that of CS cytology (p = 0.081).ConclusionLBC with FNA specimens from cervical lymphadenopathy is a useful and reliable method for the diagnosis of malignant diseases, especially of metastatic carcinomas, due to its increased sensitivity compared with CS cytology. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2016;44:169–176. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic value of liquid‐based cytology with fine needle aspiration specimens for cervical lymphadenopathy

Bandoh

Goto

Akahane

et al. 2016

Diagnostic Cytopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two LBP technologies currently in use include ThinPrep (Hologic Inc., Bedford, Mass., USA) and SurePath (BD Diagnostics, Burlington, N.C., USA) and several groups have reported their experience either by using ThinPrep [10,11,14,15] or SurePath [8,9,12,13] methods. There are subtle differences between ThinPrep and SurePath preparations which reflect different sampling devices, collection media and processing techniques [20,21,22,23]. …”

Section: Processing Of Endometrial Lbp Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Liquid-Based Preparation in the Evaluation of Endometrial Cytology

Norimatsu

Yanoh²,

Kobayashi³

2013

Acta Cytologica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Liquid-based preparation (LBP) of the endometrial lesions is an important diagnostic tool for a variety of endometrial abnormalities because of its simplicity and high quali-quantitative diagnostic yield. We aimed to investigate the LBP method for endometrial cytology to evaluate both benign and abnormal endometrial lesions. Study Design: LBP is a semiautomated methodology that has recently become widely available and has gained popularity as a method of collecting and processing both gynecologic and nongynecologic cellular specimens. Results: Some peculiar endometrial cytoarchitectural features were described using LBPs. These were advantageous to screen as compared to conventional slides due to a smaller screening area and an excellent quality of cell preparations. Conclusions: LBP is a useful tool in the cellular diagnosis and follow-up of endometrial abnormalities, which remains complementary to the emerging molecular diagnostic cytopathology. The study of LBPs from endometrial cytology could be challenging since it is affected by numerous look-alikes and diagnostic pitfalls. This review discusses these various entities and takes into consideration the ancillary techniques that may be useful in the diagnostic procedure.

show abstract

“…Our study group has tested many types of liquid-based cytological testing systems. Among them, we concluded that the BD SurePath™ Papanicolaou test is best suited for assessing endometrial cytology [1,2]. The manufacturer's protocol for cell specimens employed for this system is similar to that used to produce uterine cervical specimens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Endometrial Cytology Prepared with the Becton Dickinson SurePath™ Method: A Pilot Study by the Osaki Study Group

Yanoh¹,

Norimatsu

Munakata³

et al. 2014

Acta Cytologica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the BD SurePath™ liquid-based Papanicolaou test for assessing the cytology of intrauterine endometrial samples according to newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and a novel descriptive reporting format. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty-two endometrial samples were analyzed. All samples were obtained directly from the intrauterine cavity using the Uterobrush or Honest Super Brush. The samples used for the histological examination and cytological tests were collected simultaneously. Our study group devised new cytological diagnostic criteria for examining endometrial samples: the Osaki Study Group method. In this study, histological diagnosis was considered to be the gold standard for cytological diagnosis. A novel descriptive reporting format was also used. Results: Satisfactory cytological specimens were obtained in all cases. The sensitivity and specificity of the SurePath endometrial cytological examination method were 96.4 and 100%, respectively. Conclusion: These results indicate that the SurePath method is acceptable for clinical use. Since the SurePath method seems to be easier and allows greater preparation standardization than the conventional method, coupling it with our newly devised cytological diagnostic criteria and descriptive reporting format might represent a reliable diagnostic method for assessing endometrial specimens.

show abstract

Cytologic features of the endometrial adenocarcinoma: Comparison of ThinPrep and BD surepath preparations

Cited by 29 publications

References 26 publications

Diagnostic value of liquid‐based cytology with fine needle aspiration specimens for cervical lymphadenopathy

Diagnostic value of liquid‐based cytology with fine needle aspiration specimens for cervical lymphadenopathy

The Role of Liquid-Based Preparation in the Evaluation of Endometrial Cytology

Evaluation of Endometrial Cytology Prepared with the Becton Dickinson SurePath™ Method: A Pilot Study by the Osaki Study Group

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About