Mahovlić Vesna, Ovanin-Rakić Ana, Skopljanac-Macina Lada, Barisić Ana, Rajhvajn Sanda, Juric Danijela, Projić Ivana Samija, Ilić-Forko Jadranka, Babić Damir, Skrablin-Kucić Snjezana, Bozikov Jadranka
Department of Gynecologic Cytology, University Hospital Center Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
Coll Antropol. 2010 Mar;34(1):45-51.
Unlike cervical cytology, morphological cytology criteria in the differential diagnosis of endometrium have not yet been clearly defined, and methods to allow for more precise evaluation of endometrium status have been searched for. The aim of the present study was to assess the value of morphometric nucleus analysis of cytologic aspirate endometrial samples in proliferative, hyperplastic and malignant endometrium by use of digital image analysis. Morphometric analysis was performed on archival cytologic aspirate endometrial samples (at least 10 per group) stained according to Papanicolaou (n = 77) and May-Grünwald-Giemsa (MGG; n = 80) with the following histopathologic diagnoses: proliferative endometrium, hyperplasia simplex, hyperplasia complex, hyperplasia complex atypica, and adenocarcinoma endometriodes endometrii (grade I, II and III). Interactive image analysis (nuclear area, convex area, perimeter, maximum and minimum radius, length and breadth, as well as nucleus form factor and elongation factor) was performed by use of the SFORM software (VAMSTEC, Zagreb) on at least 50 (Papanicolaou stain) and 100 (MGG stain) well preserved endometrial epithelial cell nuclei without overlapping, at magnification of x1000. Statistical data analysis was done by use of the Statistica Ver. 6 statistical package. Multivariate analysis (ANOVA) distinguished malignant, hyperplastic and proliferative endometrium according to all morphometric variables with both staining methods (p < 0.05). However, on interactive testing of the groups (Kruskal-Wallis test), hyperplasias without atypia yielded no significant differences (p > 0.05) from atypical hyperplasia, adenocarcinoma and proliferative endometrium only according to the nucleus form factor and elongation factor (Papanicolaou stain), whereas malignant and atypical hyperplastic endometrium (MGG stain) differed statistically significantly (p < 0.05) from proliferative and hyperplastic endometrium without atypia according to all study parameters except for the nucleus form factor (p > 0.05). According to the cytologic staining method, morphometric parameters were considerably higher in MGG stained endometrial samples, reaching the level of statistical significance (p < 0.05) except for the nucleus form factor and elongation factor (p > 0.05) in the groups of hyperplasia simplex and complex, well differentiated adenocarcinoma (form factor) and atypical hyperplasia (elongation factor). A combination of cytomorphology and the morphometric variables assessed in this study can yield useful information on the cytologic state of endometrium, with special reference to the possible differentiation of the group of hyperplasia without atypia from the group of adenocarcinoma and atypical hyperplasia.
与宫颈细胞学不同,子宫内膜鉴别诊断中的形态学细胞学标准尚未明确界定,人们一直在寻找能够更精确评估子宫内膜状态的方法。本研究的目的是通过数字图像分析评估细胞学吸出子宫内膜样本的形态计量核分析在增殖期、增生期和恶性子宫内膜中的价值。对存档的细胞学吸出子宫内膜样本(每组至少10例)进行形态计量分析,这些样本根据巴氏染色法(n = 77)和May-Grünwald-Giemsa染色法(MGG;n = 80)进行染色,组织病理学诊断如下:增殖期子宫内膜、单纯性增生、复杂性增生、复杂性不典型增生以及子宫内膜样腺癌(I级、II级和III级)。使用SFORM软件(VAMSTEC,萨格勒布)在放大1000倍的情况下,对至少50个(巴氏染色)和100个(MGG染色)保存完好且不重叠的子宫内膜上皮细胞核进行交互式图像分析(核面积、凸面积、周长、最大和最小半径、长度和宽度,以及核形态因子和伸长因子)。使用Statistica Ver. 6统计软件包进行统计数据分析。多变量分析(方差分析)根据两种染色方法的所有形态计量变量区分恶性、增生性和增殖期子宫内膜(p < 0.05)。然而,在各分组的交互式检验(Kruskal-Wallis检验)中,仅根据核形态因子和伸长因子(巴氏染色),无 atypia的增生与不典型增生、腺癌和增殖期子宫内膜之间无显著差异(p > 0.05),而恶性和不典型增生性子宫内膜(MGG染色)与无 atypia的增殖期和增生期子宫内膜在除核形态因子外的所有研究参数上差异具有统计学意义(p < 0.05)(p > 0.05)。根据细胞学染色方法,MGG染色的子宫内膜样本中的形态计量参数明显更高,除单纯性和复杂性增生、高分化腺癌(形态因子)和不典型增生(伸长因子)组中的核形态因子和伸长因子外(p > 0.05),均达到统计学显著水平(p < 0.05)。本研究中评估的细胞形态学和形态计量变量的组合可以提供有关子宫内膜细胞学状态的有用信息,特别是关于无 atypia的增生组与腺癌和不典型增生组之间可能的区分。