Nuclear characteristics of the endometrial cytology: Liquid-based versus conventional preparation

Diagnostic Cytopathology

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 120-125

  Norimatsu, Yoshiaki ^a   Shigematsu, Yumie ^b   Sakamoto, Shingo ^c   Ohsaki, Hiroyuki ^a   Yanoh, Kenji ^d   Kawanishi, Namiki ^e   Kobayashi, Tadao K ^f,g  

^a EHIME PREFECTURAL UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES   (Japan)

^b Shigei Medical Research Hospital   (Japan)

^c MATSUYAMA RED CROSS HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^d SUZUKA GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^e Mihara Medical Associations Hospital   (Japan)

^f Medical Care Center   (Japan)

^g OSAKA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

conventional preparation; endometrial adenocarcinoma grade1; endometrial cytology; endometrial glandular and stromal breakdown; LBC preparation; nuclear characteristics

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CELL NUCLEUS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONVENTIONAL PREPARATION; CURETTAGE; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; ENDOMETRIAL DISEASE; ENDOMETRIAL GLANDULAR AND STROMAL BREAKDOWN; ENDOMETRIOID CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIUM CYTOLOGY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIQUID BASED CYTOLOGIC PREPARATION; METAPLASIA; NUCLEAR SHAPE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROLIFERATIVE ENDOMETRIUM; STROMA CELL;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA, ENDOMETRIOID; CELL NUCLEUS; ENDOMETRIAL NEOPLASMS; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; HISTOCYTOLOGICAL PREPARATION TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 84872607080     PISSN: 87551039     EISSN: 10970339     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/dc.21784     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Weintraub J, Morabia A,. Efficacy of a liquid-based thin layer method for cervical cancer screening in a population with a low incidence of cervical cancer. Diagn Cytopathol 2000; 22: 52-59. (Pubitemid 30022698)
2. Fremont-Smith M, Marino J, Griffin B, Spencer L, Bolick D,. Comparison of the SurePath liquid-based Papanicolaou smear with the conventional Papanicolaou smear in a multisite direct-to-vial study. Cancer 2004; 102: 269-279. (Pubitemid 39369713)
3. Bentz JS,. Liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2005; 5: 857-871. (Pubitemid 41666181)
4. Beerman H, van Dorst EB, Kuenen-Boumeester V, Hogendoorn PC,. Superior performance of liquid-based versus conventional cytology in a population-based cervical cancer screening program. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 112: 572-576.
5. Nakagawa-Okamura C, Sato S, Tsuji I, et al. Effectiveness of mass screening for endometrial cancer. Acta Cytol 2002; 46: 277-283. (Pubitemid 34625157)
6. Goodman A, Hutchinson M,. Cell surplus on sampling devices after routine cervical cytologic smears: A study of residual cell population. J Reprod Med 1996; 41: 239-241. (Pubitemid 26123679)
7. van der Graaf Y, Vooijs GP, Gaillard HLJ, Go DMDS,. Screening errors in cervical cytologic screening. Acta Cytol 1987; 31: 434-438. (Pubitemid 17124202)
8. Norimatsu Y, Shimizu K, Kobayashi TK, et al. Cellular features of endometrial hyperplasia and well-differentiated adenocarcinoma using the Endocyte sampler: Diagnositic criteria based on the cytoarchitecture of tissue fragments. Cancer 2006; 108: 77-85.
9. Norimatsu Y, Kouda H, Kobayashi TK, et al. Utility of thin-layer preparations in the endometrial cytology: Evaluation of benign endometrial lesions. Ann Diagn Pathol 2008; 12: 103-111. (Pubitemid 351312909)
10. Norimatsu Y, Kouda H, Kobayashi TK, et al. Utility of liquid-based cytology in endometrial pathology: Diagnosis of endometrial carcinoma. Cytopathology 2009; 20: 395-341.
11. Shimizu K, Norimatsu Y, Kobayashi TK, et al. Endometrial glandular and stromal breakdown. I. Cytomorphological appearance. Diagn Cytopathol 2006; 34: 609-613. (Pubitemid 44298561)
12. Norimatsu Y, Shimizu K, Kobayashi TK, et al. Endometrial glandular and stromal breakdown. II. Cytomorphology of papillary metaplastic change. Diagn Cytopathol 2006; 34: 665-669. (Pubitemid 44413690)
13. Norimatsu Y, Shigematsu Y, Sakamoto S, et al. Nuclear features of endometrial cytology: With endometrial glandular and stromal breakdown and endometrioid adenocarcinoma grade1. Diagn Cytopathol, accepted.
14. Fujihara A, Norimatsu Y, Kobayashi TK, Iwanari O, Nagaoka S,. Direct intrauterine sampling with uterobrush: Cell preparation by the "flicked" method. Diagn Cytopathol 2006; 34: 486-490.
15. Becton, Dickinson and Company. PrepStain™ slide processor Operator's manual 780-13000-00 Rev. B. Burlington, NC: Becton, Dickinson and Company; 2005.
16. Garcia F, Barker B, Davis J, et al. Thin-layer cytology and histopathology in the evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding. J Reprod Med 2003; 48: 882-888. (Pubitemid 37485095)
17. Papaefthimiou M, Symiakaki H, Mentzelopoulou P, et al. Study on the morphology and reproducibility of the diagnosis of endometrial lesions utilizing liquid-based cytology. Cancer 2005; 105: 56-64. (Pubitemid 40604938)
18. Boon ME, Drijver, JS,. Comparing cells in histology and cytology: In, Boon ME, editor. Routine cytological staining techniques theoretical background and practice. 1st ed. London: MaCmillian Education Ltd.; 1986. p 22-25.
19. Kaneko M,. Fixation and the theory. In:, Tanaka N, editor. Text book of diagnostic cytology: Its fundamentals and practice. 6th ed. Tokyo: Uchudo Yagi-Shoten Ltd.; 1979. p 66-70 (in Japanese).
20. Kimura M, Suzuki T, Naito M, Takahashi M,. Clinical evaluation of urinary cytology using PrepStain Slide Processor, The standardization and progress for accuracy are enriched by Thinlayer slide. Jpn J Med Pharm Sci 2002; 48: 693-698.
21. Tarkhan AA,. The effects of fixatives and other reagents on cell-size and tissue-bulk. J R Microsc Soc 1931; 51: 387-400.
22. Bloo G, Friberg U,. Shrinkage during fixation and embedding of histological specimens. Acta Morphol Neerl Scand 1956; 1: 12-20.
23. Meisels A, Jolicoeur C,. Criteria for the cytologic assessment of hyperplasia in endometrial samples obtained by the Endopap endometrial sampler. Acta Cytol 1985; 29: 297-302. (Pubitemid 15044816)
24. Morse AR,. The vaule of endometrial aspiration in gynaecological practice. In:, Koss LG, Coleman DV, editors. Advances in clinical cytology. London: Butterworth; 1981. p 44-63.