BackgroundAspiration of serous cavities is a simple and relatively non-invasive technique to achieve diagnosis. Cytologic evaluation of body cavity fluid is diagnostically challenging.MethodsA total of 150 fluid specimens were examined for conventional cytological smear (CS) and cell block method (CB). Out of 150 fluids, 79 were pleural fluid, 69 were ascitic fluid and 2 pericardial fluid. Each fluid specimen was divided in two equal parts: one part was subjected to conventional smear technique, while the other part was subjected to 10% alcohol-acetic acid-formalin cell block technique. Overall morphological details, cellularity, architecture, nuclear and cytoplasmic details were studied in both CS and CB techniques.ResultsIn this study, the utility of the CB method in the cytodiagnosis of malignant effusions was found to be highly significant as compared to the CS method. The additional yield of malignancy was 10% more as was obtained by the CB method.ConclusionFor the final cytodiagnosis of body fluid, there is statistically significant difference between the two techniques. In other words, CB is superior to CS method.

No abstract

Introduction:Transthoracic guided fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of clinically suspected lung tumors is an increasingly common procedure in diagnosis. Cytospin Smear and Cellblock preparations of available material are helpful in subtyping and confirming the diagnosis, and they can also be used for further studies, i.e., special stain and immunohistochemistry, etc.Aims and Objectives:This research was undertaken to study the technique of guided transthoracic lung FNAC of clinically suspected lung tumors and the establish role of FNAC smears, cytospin smears, and cellblocks in the detection and typing of neoplastic lung lesions and correlation.Materials and Methods:Guided FNAC was taken from 100 cases of clinically suspected lung tumor and FNAC smears, cytospin smears, and cellblocks of aspirated material were studied over a period of 2 years from September 2011 to September 2013.Results:The material adequacies were 80% in FNAC smears, 83% in cytospin smears, and 89% in cellblocks. Additional information supported by cytospin smear and cellblock was 3% and 9%, respectively. Architectural preservation was better in FNAC smears (85%) and cellblocks (73.03%) than that in cytospin smears (31.33%). Morphological preservation was better in FNAC smears (90%) and cellblocks (75.28%) than that in cytospin smears (14.46%). Diagnostic accuracy was increased in the cellblocks and cytospin smears.Conclusion:Cytospin smear was helpful when low cellular material was obtained, and the concomitant examination of cellblocks not only confirmed the diagnosis of malignancy but also helped in classifying the obtained material and allowed further study on the same.

No abstract