Pant Ishita, Chaturvedi Sujata, Bala Kiran, Kushwaha Suman
Department of Pathology, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India.
Department of Neurology, Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences, Delhi, India.
Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2015 Oct-Dec;18(4):398-402. doi: 10.4103/0972-2327.165455.
Past few decades have seen an increasing application of techniques like electron microscopy, western blotting, and molecular genetics in the evaluation of muscle diseases. However, due to their limited availability, histopathological interpretation of muscle biopsies still remains an important component of diagnostic approach to muscle diseases. A systematic methodology is required in the evaluation and interpretation of muscle biopsies. This study was undertaken to analyze the histopathological spectrum of 164 muscle biopsies and to assess the diagnostic yield of basic histopathological procedures in the work up of muscle biopsy.
Retrospective analysis was done for 164 cases of muscle biopsies. Step-wise approach was adopted to assess the efficacy of routine stains, enzyme histochemistry, and immunohistochemistry. Based on hematoxylin and rosin (H and E) appearance, biopsies were broadly categorized into destructive, nondestructive but myopathic, and inflammatory morphology. Role of special stains, enzyme, and immunohistochemical stains in each category was then evaluated.
On the basis of histopathological features, 164 muscle biopsies were broadly categorized into biopsies with abnormal histopathological features (115) and biopsies with normal histopathology (49). Abnormal muscle biopsies were further categorized into destructive morphology (56.5%), nondestructive but myopathic morphology (30.5%), and inflammatory pathology (13%). A near definitive diagnosis could be made in 115 cases out of 164 muscle biopsies on the basis of routine histopathology, enzyme histochemistry, and immunohistochemistry.
Though advanced techniques like electron microscopy, western blotting, and molecular genetics are essential for confirmatory diagnosis, a substantive diagnostic yield can be offered with the basic armamentarium of routine (frozen) stains, enzyme histochemistry, and immunohistochemistry.
在过去几十年中,电子显微镜、蛋白质印迹法和分子遗传学等技术在肌肉疾病评估中的应用越来越广泛。然而,由于这些技术的可用性有限,肌肉活检的组织病理学解释仍然是肌肉疾病诊断方法的重要组成部分。在评估和解释肌肉活检时需要一种系统的方法。本研究旨在分析164例肌肉活检的组织病理学谱,并评估基本组织病理学程序在肌肉活检检查中的诊断率。
对164例肌肉活检病例进行回顾性分析。采用逐步方法评估常规染色、酶组织化学和免疫组织化学的效果。根据苏木精和伊红(H&E)染色表现,活检标本大致分为破坏性、非破坏性但肌病性和炎性形态。然后评估每种类型中特殊染色、酶和免疫组织化学染色的作用。
根据组织病理学特征,164例肌肉活检标本大致分为组织病理学特征异常的活检标本(115例)和组织病理学正常的活检标本(49例)。异常肌肉活检标本进一步分为破坏性形态(56.5%)、非破坏性但肌病性形态(30.5%)和炎性病理(13%)。在164例肌肉活检标本中,有115例基于常规组织病理学、酶组织化学和免疫组织化学可做出近乎明确的诊断。
尽管电子显微镜、蛋白质印迹法和分子遗传学等先进技术对于确诊至关重要,但常规(冷冻)染色、酶组织化学和免疫组织化学等基本方法也能提供可观的诊断率。