Objective: The technique of conventional cell blocks is rather labor- and time-consuming. The purpose of this study was to generate a convenient and quick manual procedure using ultrasound processing which could be applied in most developing countries and to evaluate its efficacy in the cytopathologic diagnosis of cavity fluids. Study Design: We carried out a rapid cell block procedure using egg albumen as the pre-embedded adjuvant and using ultrasound to accelerate fixation, dehydration, clearing and waxing. The diagnostic efficacy was evaluated as compared with tissue blocks and liquid-based cytology tests (LCTs). Results: A total of 155 samples underwent rapid cell block detection, and 61 were diagnosed as malignancies. The method was able to produce high-quality formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded cell block sections and has similar diagnostic validity to the LCT. The immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization staining patterns in rapid cell block sections were similar to those in their tissue block counterparts. Conclusions: The ultrasound-processed rapid cell block is a convenient and quick method for cytopathologic diagnosis. We consider it may serve as an effective adjuvant technique for most primary medical institutions.

Keywords:
Cell block, Ultrasound, Cytopathology, Immunohistochemistry, In situ hybridization
1.
Chapman CB, Whalen EJ: The examination of serous fluids by the cell-block technic. N Engl J Med 1947;237:215-220.
2.
van Hemel BM, Suurmeijer AJ: Effective application of the methanol-based PreservCyt(™) fixative and the Cellient(™) automated cell block processor to diagnostic cytopathology, immunocytochemistry, and molecular biology. Diagn Cytopathol 2013;41:734-741.
3.
Nathan NA, Narayan E, Smith MM, Horn MJ: Cell block cytology. Improved preparation and its efficacy in diagnostic cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 2000;114:599-606.
4.
Varsegi GM, Shidham V: Cell block preparation from cytology specimen with predominance of individually scattered cells. J Vis Exp 2009;29:1316.
5.
Wagner DG, Russell DK, Benson JM, Schneider AE, Hoda RS, Bonfiglio TA: Cellient automated cell block versus traditional cell block preparation: a comparison of morphologic features and immunohistochemical staining. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:730-736.
6.
He QL, Zhu YZ, Zheng GJ, Shi LC, Hu SW, Li CT: A new convenient technique for making cell blocks. Cell Tissue Res 2012;350:395-400.
7.
Jing X, Li QK, Bedrossian U, Michael CW: Morphologic and immunocytochemical performances of effusion cell blocks prepared using 3 different methods. Am J Clin Pathol 2013;139:177-182.
8.
Chu WS, Furusato B, Wong K, Sesterhenn IA, Mostofi FK, Wei MQ, Zhu Z, Abbondanzo SL, Liang Q: Ultrasound-accelerated formalin fixation of tissue improves morphology, antigen and mRNA preservation. Mod Pathol 2005;18:850-863.
9.
Chu WS, Liang Q, Tang Y, King R, Wong K, Gong M, Wei M, Liu J, Feng SH, Lo SC, Andriko JA, Orr M: Ultrasound-accelerated tissue fixation/processing achieves superior morphology and macromolecule integrity with storage stability. J Histochem Cytochem 2006;54:503-513.
10.
Riesz P, Kondo T: Free radical formation induced by ultrasound and its biological implications. Free Radic Biol Med 1992;13:247-270.
11.
Hammar SP, Dacic S: Immunohistology of lung and pleural neoplasms; in Dabbs DJ (ed): Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry: Theranostic and Genomic Applications, ed 3. Philadelphia, Saunders, 2010, pp 423-427.
12.
Cho JS, Kim GE, Lee JS, Lee JH, Nam JH, Choi C: Diagnostic usefulness of MUC1 and MUC4 for distinguishing between metastatic adenocarcinoma cells and reactive mesothelial cells in effusion cell blocks. Acta Cytol 2013;57:377-383.
13.
Hyun TS, Barnes M, Tabatabai ZL: The diagnostic utility of D2-40, calretinin, CK5/6, desmin and MOC-31 in the differentiation of mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma in pleural effusion cytology. Acta Cytol 2012;56:527-532.
14.
Johnson H, Cohen C, Fatima N, Duncan D, Siddiqui MT: Thyroid transcription factor 1 and Napsin A double stain: utilizing different vendor antibodies for diagnosing lung adenocarcinoma. Acta Cytol 2012;56:596-602.
15.
Moreira AL, Hasanovic A: Molecular characterization by immunocytochemistry of lung adenocarcinoma on cytology specimens. Acta Cytol 2012;56:603-610.
16.
Chivukula M, Dabbs DJ: Immunocytochemistry; in Bibbo M, Wilbur D (eds): Comprehensive Cytopathology, ed 3. Philadelphia, Saunders, 2008, pp 1043-1069.
17.
Chivukula M, Dabbs DJ: Immunocytology; in Dabbs DJ (ed): Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry: Theranostic and Genomic Applications, ed 3. Philadelphia, Saunders, 2010, pp 890-918.
18.
Leung SW, Bedard YC: Immunocytochemical staining on ThinPrep processed smears. Mod Pathol 1996;9:304-306.
19.
Dabbs DJ, Abendroth CS, Grenko RT, Wang X, Radcliffe GE: Immunocytochemistry on the Thinprep processor. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;17:388-392.
20.
Zhang Z, Zhao L, Guo H, Pan Q, Sun Y: Diagnostic significance of immunocytochemistry on fine needle aspiration biopsies processed by thin-layer cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2012;40:1071-1076.
21.
Fetsch PA, Simsir A, Brosky K, Abati A: Comparison of three commonly used cytologic preparations in effusion immunocytochemistry. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;26:61-66.
22.
Gong Y, Sun X, Michael CW, Attal S, Williamson BA, Bedrossian CW: Immunocytochemistry of serous effusion specimens: a comparison of ThinPrep versus cell block. Diagn Cytopathol 2003;28:1-5.
23.
Sumiyoshi K, Shibayama Y, Akashi S, Nohara T, Iwamoto M, Kobayashi T, Nishimura H, Yoshinaka R, Harada T, Tanigawa N: Detection of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 protein and gene in fine needle aspiration cytology specimens and tissue sections from invasive breast cancer: can cytology specimens take the place of tissue sections? Oncol Rep 2006;15:803-808.
24.
Hanley KZ, Birdsong GG, Cohen C, Siddiqui MT: Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in breast carcinomas: comparison on cell block, needle-core, and tissue block preparations. Cancer 2009;117:279-288.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
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.