Evaluation of rapid staining techniques for cytologic diagnosis of intracranial lesions

American Journal of Veterinary Research

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 381-386

  Long, Sam N ^a   Anderson, T James ^a   Long, Fenella H A ^a   Johnson, Pamela E J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DYE; TOLONIUM CHLORIDE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; ZYNOSTAIN;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BRAIN DISEASE; CAT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DOG; EUTHANASIA; EVALUATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAY GRUENWALD GIEMSA STAIN; NONHUMAN; PEROPERATIVE CARE; RANDOMIZATION; WRIGHT STAIN;

ANIMALIA; CANIS FAMILIARIS; FELIS CATUS;

EID: 0036521403     PISSN: 00029645     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.2002.63.381     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Spiegel EA. Wylis HT. Marks M. et al. Stereotactic apparatus for operations on human brain. Science 1947;106:349-350.
2. Vernau KM, Higgins RJ, Bollen AW, et al. Primary canine and feline nervous system tumors: intraoperative diagnosis using the smear technique. Vet Pathol 2001;38:47-57.
3. Brainard JA, Prayson RA, Barnett GH. Frozen section evaluation of stereotactic brain biopsies: diagnostic yield at the stereotactic target position in 188 cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;121:481-484.
4. Burger PC, Nelson JS. Stereotactic brain biopsies: specimen preparation and evaluation. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997;121:477-480.
5. Kondziolka D, Firlik AD, Lunsford LD. Complications of stereotactic brain surgery. Neurol Clin 1998;16:35-54.
6. Reyes MG, Fayez Homisi M, McDonald LW, et al. Imprints, smears and frozen sections of brain tumors. Neurosurgery 1991; 21:575-579.
7. Kitchen ND, Bradford R, McLaughlin JE. The value of peroperative smear examination during stereotactic biopsy Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1993;121:196-198.
8. Firlik KS, Martinez AJ, Lunsford LD. Use of cytological preparations for the intraoperative diagnosis of stereotactically obtained brain biopsies: a 19-year experience and survey of neuropathologists. J Neurosurg 1999;91:454-458.
9. Adams JH, Graham DI, Doyle D. Brain biopsy: the smear technique for neurosurgical biopsies. London: Chapman and Hall, 1981;8-52.
10. Moss TH, Nicoll JA, Ironside JW. Intraoperative diagnosis of CNS tumours. London: Arnold, 1997;1-23.
11. Folkerth RD. Smears and frozen sections in the intraoperative diagnosis of central nervous system lesions. Neurosurg Clin North Am 1994;5:1-18.
12. Gaudin PB, Sherman ME, Brat DJ, et al. Accuracy of grading gliomas on CT-guided stereotactic biopsies: a survival analysis. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;17:461-466.
13. Hayden R, Cajulis RS, Frias-Hidvegi D, et al. Intraoperative diagnostic techniques for stereotactic brain biopsy: cytology versus frozen-section histopathology. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 1995;65:187-193.
14. Kleihues P, Volk B, Anagnostopoulos J, et al. Morphologic evaluation of stereotactic brain tumor biopsies. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien) 1984;33:171-181.
15. Martinez AJ, Pollack I, Hall WA, et al. Touch preparations in the rapid intraoperative diagnosis of central nervous system lesions: a comparison with frozen sections and paraffin-embedded sections. Modern Pathol 1988;1:378-384.
16. Mennel HD, Rossberg C, Lorenz H, et al. Reliability of simple cytological methods in brain tumor biopsy diagnosis. Neurochirurgia (Stuttg) 1989;32:129-134.
17. Ostertag CB, Mennel HD, Kiessfing M. Stereotactic biopsy of brain tumors. Surg Neurol 1980;14:275-283.
18. Koblik PD, LeCouteur RA, Higgins RJ, et al. Modification and application of a pelorus mark III stereotactic system for CT guided brain biopsy in 50 dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1999;40:424-433.
19. Koblik PD, LeCouteur RA, Higgins RJ, et al. CT-guided brain biopsy using a modified pelorus mark III stereotactic system: experience with 50 dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrsound 1999;40:434-440.
20. Zimmerman KL, Bender HS, Boon GD, et al. A comparison of the cytologic and histologic features of meningiomas in four dogs. Vet Clin Pathol 2000;29:29-34.
21. Eich CS, Whitehair JG, Moroff SD, et al. The accuracy of intraoperative cytopathological diagnosis compared with conventional histopathological diagnosis. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2000;36:16-18.
22. Whitehair JG, Griffey SM, Olander HJ, et al. The accuracy of intraoperative diagnoses based on examination of frozen sections: a prospective comparison with paraffin-embedded sections. Vet Surg 1993;22:255-259.
23. Slowinski J, Harabin-Slowinska M, Mrowka R. Smear technique in the intra-operative brain tumor diagnosis: its advantages and limitations. Neurol Res 1999;21:121-124.
24. Jorundsson E, Lumsden JH, Jacobs RM. Rapid staining techniques in cytopathology: a review and comparison of modified protocols for hematoxylin and eosin, papanicolaou and romanowsky stains. Vet Clin Pathol 1999;28:100-108.
25. Valdes-Gorcia J, Espinoza-Diaz DM, Paredes-Diaz E. Stereotactic biopsy of brain stem and posterior fossa lesions in children. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1998;140:899-903.
26. Morrison WB, DeNicola DB. Advantages and disadvantages of cytology and histopathology for the diagnosis of cancer. Semin Vet Med Surg Small Anim 1993;8:222-227.