Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate liquid-based preparations (LBP) as a replacement for conventional smears (CS) of bronchial brushing (BB) and transbronchial fine-needle aspiration (TBNA) samples obtained via fiberoptic bronchoscope. Study Design: Bronchial brushing and TBNA samples were obtained from 62 and 33 patients by fiberoptic bronchoscopy, respectively. Liquid-based preparations were prepared from needle rinse after initial CS preparation. We compared cellularity, cell morphology, and background between the LBP and CS slides. Results: Correspondence rates between LBP and CS diagnoses in the above 3 categories were 90.3% in the BB and 97.0% in the TBNA samples. If suspicious cases were regarded as malignant, correspondence rates reached 98.4 and 100%, respectively. Histological diagnoses by LBP were mostly the same as those by CS and by biopsy or operation samples. Morphologically, cells and nuclei were shrunk in the LBP; however, the shrinking was not severe enough to influence cytological diagnoses. Blood background and air-drying, which were observed on many of the CS slides, were not detected on the LBP slides. Conclusion: It is possible to use LBP for routine laboratory processing of BB and TBNA samples as a replacement for CS.

1.
Howell LP, Davis RL, Belk TI, Agdigos R, Lowe J: The AutoCyte preparation system for gynecologic cytology. Acta Cytol 1998;42:171–177.
2.
Scimia M: ThinPrep Pap test: a platform for gynecological diagnosis. Adv Clin Path 2001;5:183–184.
3.
Kurtycz DF, Hoerl HD: Thin-layer technology: tempered enthusiasm. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;23:1–5.
4.
Linder J: Recent advances in thin-layer cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 1998;18:24–32.
5.
Wright RG, Halford JA: Evaluation of thin-layer methods in urine cytology. Cytopathology 2001;12:306–313.
6.
Rana DN, O’Donnell M, Malkin A, Griffin M: A comparative study: conventional preparation and ThinPrep 2000 in respiratory cytology. Cytopathology 2001;12:390–398.
7.
Wu GP, Wang EH, Li JH, Fu ZM, Han S: Clinical application of the liquid-based cytological test in cytological screening of sputum for the diagnosis of lung cancer. Respirology 2009;14:124–128.
8.
Konofaos P, Tomos P, Malagari K, Karakatsani A, Pavlopoulos D, Lachanas E, et al: The role of ThinPrep cytology in the investigation of lung tumors. Surg Oncol 2006;15:173–178.
9.
Kim S, Owens CL: Analysis of ThinPrep cytology in establishing the diagnosis of small cell carcinoma of lung. Cancer Cytopathol 2009;117:51–56.
10.
Astall E, Atkinson C, Morton N, Goddard MJ: The evaluation of liquid-based ‘Cyto-SED’ cytology of bronchioalveolar lavage specimens in the diagnosis of pulmonary neoplasia against conventional direct smears. Cytopathology 2003;14:143–149.
11.
Elsheikh TM, Kirkpatrick JL, Wu HH: Comparison of ThinPrep and cytospin preparations in the evaluation of exfoliative cytology specimens. Cancer 2006;108:144–149.
12.
Lee KR, Papillo JL, St John T, Eyerer GJ: Evaluation of the ThinPrep processor for fine needle aspiration specimens. Acta Cytol 1996;40:895–899.
13.
Wang HH, Sovie S, Trawinski G, Garcia LW, Abu-Jawdeh GM, Upton M, et al: ThinPrep processing of endoscopic brushing specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 1996;105:163–167.
14.
Wallace WA, Potvin PG: Structurally diverse aggregating condensations of Ti(IV) catecholates. Inorg Chem 2007;46:9463–9472.
15.
Hoda RS: Non-gynecologic cytology on liquid-based preparations: a morphologic review of facts and artifacts. Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:621–634.
16.
Kovnat DM, Rath GS, Anderson WM, Siber F, Snider GL: Bronchial brushing through the flexible fiberoptic bronchoscope in the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary lesions. Chest 1975;67:179–184.
17.
Garg S, Handa U, Mohan H, Janmeja AK: Comparative analysis of various cytohistological techniques in diagnosis of lung diseases. Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:26–31.
18.
Smith MJ, Kini SR, Watson E: Fine needle aspiration and endoscopic brush cytology: comparison of direct smears and rinsings. Acta Cytol 1980;24:456–459.
19.
Koivurinne KI, Shield PW: Thin-layer preparations of dithiothreitol-treated bronchial washing specimens. Acta Cytol 2003;47:637–644.
20.
Kacar N, Tuksavul F, Edipoglu O, Ermete S, Guclu SZ: Effectiveness of transbronchial needle aspiration in the diagnosis of exophytic endobronchial lesions and submucosal/peribronchial diseases of the lung. Lung Cancer 2005;50:221–226.
21.
Shure D: Transbronchial biopsy and needle aspiration. Chest 1989;95:1130–1138.
22.
Weidmann J, King LC, Bibbo M: Modification of CytoRich Red fixative system for use on bloody Pap and fine-needle aspiration smears. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;20:95–98.
23.
Michael CW, Hunter B: Interpretation of fine-needle aspirates processed by the ThinPrep technique: cytologic artifacts and diagnostic pitfalls. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;23:6–13.
24.
Chacho MS, Mattie ME, Schwartz PE: Cytohistologic correlation rates between conventional Papanicolaou smears and ThinPrep cervical cytology: a comparison. Cancer 2003;99:135–140.
25.
Hoerl HD, Schink J, Hartenbach E, Wagner JL, Kurtycz DF: Exfoliative cytology of primary poorly differentiated (small-cell) neuroendocrine carcinoma of the uterine cervix in ThinPrep material: a case report. Diagn Cytopathol 2000;23:14–18.
26.
Bavikatty NR, Michael CW: Cytologic features of small-cell carcinoma on ThinPrep. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;29:8–12.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.