Wittenberg Leah A, Maberley David A, Ma Patrick E, Wade N Kevin, Gill Harpreet, White Valerie A
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Ophthalmology. 2008 Nov;115(11):1944-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.05.022. Epub 2008 Jul 31.
To assess the contribution of vitreous cytologic evaluation to the diagnosis of clinically undiagnosed vitritis.
Retrospective chart review and database study.
Two hundred seventy-eight eyes of 255 patients who had diagnostic vitrectomies.
We performed a retrospective review of all patients who had vitreous cytology specimens between October 1990 and October 2005 at Vancouver General Hospital. We reviewed the patient charts to obtain the results of microbial and other laboratory testing and to determine the follow-up course.
Categories of vitreous cytology specimen results and final clinical diagnosis in patients who had diagnostic vitrectomy specimens.
We reviewed vitreous cytology results from diagnostic vitrectomies in 278 eyes of 255 patients. One patient had 3 diagnostic vitrectomies, 21 patients had 2 procedures, and 233 patients had a single procedure. We categorized the results of vitreous cytologic examination into 6 major categories: acute inflammation consistent with endophthalmitis (n = 33), primary intraocular lymphoma (PIOL; n = 14), granulomatous inflammation (n = 41), mixed chronic nonspecific inflammation (n = 76), hypocellular specimens (n = 50), and miscellaneous specimens (n = 64). We determined that cytologic diagnosis aided or confirmed a clinical diagnosis, or ruled out PIOL, in 126/228 (55.3%) specimens where patients were not lost to follow-up.
Cytologic analysis of vitreous specimens in clinically undiagnosed vitritis is a useful procedure, particularly in the diagnosis of endophthalmitis and PIOL. It is also helpful in confirming granulomatous, nonspecific, and miscellaneous clinical diagnoses and in ruling out PIOL. In this series, it helped to suggest or confirm a diagnosis in the majority of our specimens.
评估玻璃体细胞学评估对临床未确诊的葡萄膜炎诊断的贡献。
回顾性病历审查和数据库研究。
255例接受诊断性玻璃体切除术患者的278只眼。
我们对1990年10月至2005年10月在温哥华总医院进行玻璃体细胞学标本检查的所有患者进行了回顾性研究。我们查阅患者病历以获取微生物学和其他实验室检查结果,并确定随访过程。
接受诊断性玻璃体切除标本患者的玻璃体细胞学标本结果类别和最终临床诊断。
我们回顾了255例患者278只眼中诊断性玻璃体切除术的玻璃体细胞学结果。1例患者接受了3次诊断性玻璃体切除术,21例患者接受了2次手术,233例患者接受了1次手术。我们将玻璃体细胞学检查结果分为6大类:与眼内炎一致的急性炎症(n = 33)、原发性眼内淋巴瘤(PIOL;n = 14)、肉芽肿性炎症(n = 41)、混合性慢性非特异性炎症(n = 76)、细胞减少的标本(n = 50)和其他标本(n = 64)。我们确定,在126/228(55.3%)未失访患者的标本中,细胞学诊断辅助或证实了临床诊断,或排除了PIOL。
对临床未确诊的葡萄膜炎进行玻璃体标本的细胞学分析是一种有用的方法,特别是在眼内炎和PIOL的诊断中。它也有助于证实肉芽肿性、非特异性和其他临床诊断,并排除PIOL。在本系列研究中,它有助于在大多数标本中提示或证实诊断。