IJCRR - Vol 07 Issue 17, September, 2015
CYTOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF SEROUS BODY FLUIDS: A TWO YEAR EXPERIENCE IN TERTIARY CARE CENTRE FROM CENTRAL INDIA
Author: Preeti Rihal Chakrabarti, Priyanka Kiyawat, Amit Varma, Purti Agrawal, Shilpi Dosi, Monal Dixit
Background: Cytological examination of serous body fluids is extremely important since it throws light on the cause, presence of metastatic cells, typing of unknown cases, staging and prognosis of cancer.
Aims and Objectives: 1) To study and evaluate current trends in cytological evaluation of serous effusions for various pathological conditions in a tertiary care centre. 2) To analyse their frequency in relation to diagnosis.
Material and Methods: Our Study was cross-sectional study performed in Department of Pathology, Sri Aurobindo Medical College and Post Graduate Institute from 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2014. Serous effusions included in the study were pleural, pericardial and peritoneal in origin. All other fluids were excluded from the study. The clinical history and relevant parameters were noted and correlated clinically. Conventional smears and cytospin method were performed on all fluids. Both air dried and wet fixed smears in methyl alcohol were used and stained with Papanicolaou(PAP) and May-Grunwald-Giemsa(MGG) stain.
Results: Out of 902 cases, 400(44.3%) were pleural fluid, 485(53.7%) were peritoneal fluid and 17 (1.9%) were pericardial fluids. 820 (90.9%) were of benign effusion and 82(9.1%) were of malignant effusion. Total transudate cases in our study were 622 (68.9%) and exudates were 280 (31.04%). Male to female ratio was 1.5:1 with youngest patient 20 years old and eldest was 85years old.
Conclusion: Benign effusions are common in younger age group and malignant in older age group. Combined approach to morphology with May-Grunwald-Giemsa (MGG) and Papanicolaou (PAP) helped in better interpretation than either methods used individually. Preliminary fluid analysis for cytology in resource limited settings, still remains the most convenient and cost effective method in arriving at the diagnosis, thereby reducing the need for invasive investigations and their related complications. Presence and absence of malignant cells at times can be the only clue to the presence of malignancy thereby affecting the prognosis and treatment outcome of the patient.
Keywords: Serous effusion, Transudate, Exudate, Adenocarcinoma
Preeti Rihal Chakrabarti, Priyanka Kiyawat, Amit Varma, Purti Agrawal, Shilpi Dosi, Monal Dixit. CYTOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF SEROUS BODY FLUIDS: A TWO YEAR EXPERIENCE IN TERTIARY CARE CENTRE FROM CENTRAL INDIA International Journal of Current Research and Review. Vol 07 Issue 17, September, 01-06
1. LG Koss, MR Melamed. 5th Edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Williams; 2005. Editors. Koss’ Diagnostic Cytology and Its Histopathologic Bases; 919-22.
2. Shidham VB, Falzon M. Serous effusions. In: Gray W, Kocjan G: editors. Diagnostic Cytopathology, 3rd Edition. Churchill Livingstone, Elsevier 2010; 115-175.
3. Ali SZ, Cibas Es. Serous cavity fluid and cerebrospinal fluid cytopathology. New York Springer ;2012:77-131.
4. Frist B, Kahan AV, Koss LG. Comparison of the diagnostic values of biopsies of pleura and cytological evaluation of pleural fluids. Am J Clin Pathol 1979;72:48-5.
5. Sherwani R, Akhtar K, Naqvi AH, Akhtar S, Abrari A, Bhargava R. Diagnostic and prognostic significance of cytology in effusions. J cytol 2005;22:73-7.
6. Romero S, Candela A, Martin C, Hernandez L, Trigo C, Gil J. Evaluation of different criteria for the separation of pleural transduates and exudates. Chest 1993;104:399-404.
7. Hathila RN, Dudhat RB, Saini PK, Italiya SL, Kaptan KR, Shah MB. Diagnosyic importance of serous fluid examination for detection of various pathological conditions- A study of 355 cases. Int J Med Sci Public Health 2013;2:975-979.
8. Kushwaha R, Shasikala P, Hiremath S, Basavraj HG. Cells in pleural fluid and their fluid in differential diagnosis.J Cytol 2008;25:138-43.
9. Lim MH, Garrettc J, Mowlem L, Yap E. Diagnosing malignant pleural effusions: how do we compare? N Z Med J 2013;126:42- 48
10. Luigi DiBonito, Giovanni Falconieri, Isabella Colautti, Daniela Bonifacio, Sandra Dudine: The Positive Peural Effusion. Acta Cytol 1992;36:329-32.
11. James R. Hallman, Kim R.Geisinger: Cytology of fluids from Pleural, Peritoneal, Pericardial cavities in children. Acta Cytol 1992;36:329-32.
12. Jha R, Shrestha HG, Sayami G, Pradhan Sb. Study of effusion cytology in patients with simultaneous malignancy and ascitis. Kathmandu university medical journal 2006;4:483-487.
13. Parsons SL, Lang MW, Steele RJ. Malignant ascitis: a 2-year review from the teaching hospital. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1996;22:237- 9.
14. Wilailik S, Linasmita V, Srivannaboon S. Malignant Ascitis in female patients, a seven year review. J Med Assos Thai 1999;82:15-9.
15. Monte SA, Ehya H, Lang WR. Positive effusion cytology as the initial presentation of malignancy. Acta Cytol. 1987;4:448-52.
16. Karoo RS, Lyold TDR et al, Garcea G, Redway HD, Robertson GSR. How valuable is ascitic fluid cytology in detection and management of malignancy. Post graduate medical journal 2003;79:291-299.
17. Robert E. Zipf, William W.johnston. The role of cytology in the evaluation of Pericardial effusions. Chest 1972;62:593-96