Norimatsu Yoshiaki, Sakamoto Shingo, Ohsaki Hiroyuki, Ozaki Satoru, Yokoyama Toshiro, Shimizu Keiko, Yanoh Kenji, Akiyama Minoru, Bamba Masamichi, Kobayashi Tadao K
Department of Medical Technology, Ehime Prefectural University of Health Sciences, Ehime, Japan.
Diagn Cytopathol. 2013 Aug;41(8):673-81. doi: 10.1002/dc.22921. Epub 2013 Feb 26.
We compared the cytoarchitectural features used for the cytologic diagnosis of endometrial adenocarcinoma (EC) using ThinPrep® (TPS = ThinPrep Sample) and BD SurePath™ (SPS = SurePath Sample) preparations. In 20 patients, a direct endometrial sample using the Uterobrush was obtained. Nineteen cases of EA and one case of carcinosarcoma were studied. TPS and SPS were performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Moreover, after the TPS preparation, the residual material was also used to prepare an SPS sample (TP-SPS = ThinPrep-Surepath sample). The following points were investigated in both preparations: (1) number of cell clumps; SPS had a significantly higher (20.9) than TPS (1.7) and TP-SPS (10.3); (2) long axis of clumps; SPS had a significantly higher (215.4) than TPS (146.0); (3) rate of cell clumps with longer axes than 200 μm; SPS had a significantly higher (36.7) than TPS (15.2) and TP-SPS (24.2). TP-SPS showed higher values than TPS; (4) nuclear area; TPS had a significant higher (61.2) than SPS (40.8) and TP-SPS (38.6); (5) degree of overlapping nuclei; SPS (3.4) had a significantly higher number of overlapping nuclei than TPS (0.7) and TP-SPS (2.1); (6) nuclear chromatin pattern; no significant differences for the nuclear chromatin pattern were found in the three different methods. The poor performance of TPS versus SPS and TP-SPS was explained with the heavy blood contamination of the samples, and the absence of adhesive coating in the slides is used for TPS. Further investigation of technical differences in liquid-based cytology methodologies is needed.
我们比较了使用ThinPrep®（TPS = ThinPrep样本）和BD SurePath™（SPS = SurePath样本）制片法对子宫内膜腺癌（EC）进行细胞学诊断时的细胞结构特征。对20例患者，使用子宫刷获取直接的子宫内膜样本。研究了19例子宫内膜腺癌和1例癌肉瘤。TPS和SPS均按照制造商的建议进行操作。此外，在TPS制片后，剩余材料也用于制备SPS样本（TP-SPS = ThinPrep-Surepath样本）。对两种制片法的以下几点进行了研究：（1）细胞团数量；SPS（20.9）显著高于TPS（1.7）和TP-SPS（10.3）；（2）细胞团长轴；SPS（215.4）显著高于TPS（146.0）；（3）长轴大于200μm的细胞团比例；SPS（36.7）显著高于TPS（15.2）和TP-SPS（24.2）。TP-SPS的值高于TPS；（4）核面积；TPS（61.2）显著高于SPS（40.8）和TP-SPS（38.6）；（5）核重叠程度；SPS（3.4）的核重叠数量显著多于TPS（0.7）和TP-SPS（2.1）；（6）核染色质模式；三种不同方法在核染色质模式上未发现显著差异。TPS相对于SPS和TP-SPS表现不佳的原因是样本血液污染严重，且用于TPS的载玻片没有粘附涂层。需要进一步研究液基细胞学方法的技术差异。
