Objective: We aimed to assess the cytological findings from fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of breast lesions with conventional smear (CS) and SurePath® (SP) cytology. Study Design: This was a cross-sectional study of women who underwent FNA from January 2012 to June 2013 for breast lesions with benign ultrasonography impressions in Fortaleza, Brazil. Two groups were formed. The first was composed of 102 samples subjected to CS and the second of 65 samples subjected to SP. The number of smears, the cellularity and the diagnostic hypotheses were compared. Fisher's exact tests with 95% confidence intervals were applied. Results: The women ranged in age from 22 to 75 years. SP cytology indicated greater cellularity than CS for the cystic lesions (p < 0.05). In the CS group, 72.5% of the samples required 3-4 slides, but in the SP group, only 9.2% required a second slide. The cellularity of the cystic samples was significantly greater with the SP method (p < 0.01). Conclusion: In FNA cytology of the breast, SP is a tool that is comparable to CS, but with the added benefits of better cellularity results for cystic lesions and requiring fewer slides for analysis.

Keywords:
Liquid-based cytology, Benign breast lesions, Fine-needle aspiration, SurePath®
1.
Berner A, Sauer T: Fine-needle aspiration cytology of the breast. Ultrastruct Pathol 2011;35:162-167.
2.
Ryu HS, Park I, Park S, Jung Y, Park S, Shin H: A pilot study evaluating liquid-based fine needle aspiration cytology of breast lesions: a cytomorphological comparison of SurePath liquid-based preparations and conventional smears. Acta Cytol 2013;57:391-399.
3.
Geers C, Bourgain C: Liquid-based FNAC of the thyroid: a 4-year survey with SurePath. Cancer Cytopathol 2011;119:58-67.
4.
Ducatman BS, Wang H: Breast; in Cibas ES Ducatman BS (eds): Cytology: Diagnostic Principles and Clinical Correlates, ed 4. Philadelphia, Elsevier-Saunders, 2014.
5.
Yamashita A, Sakuma K, Shiina Y: Standardization of fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast - comparison of Auto Cyto Fix and conventional smears. Cytopathology 2003;14:79-83.
6.
Rossi E, Zannoni G, Moncelsi S, Stigliano E, Santeusanio G, Lombardi C, et al: Application of liquid-based cytology to fine-needle aspiration biopsies of the thyroid gland. Front Endocrinol 2012;3:57.
7.
Hoda RS: Non-gynecologic cytology on liquid-based preparations: a morphologic review of facts and artifacts. Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:621-634.
8.
Pagani C, Coscia DR, Dellabianca C, Bonardi M, Alessi S, Calliada F: Ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of breast lesions. J Ultrasound 2011;14:182-187.
9.
Smith MJ, Heffron CC, Rothwell JR, Loftus BM, Jeffers M, Geraghty JG: Fine needle aspiration cytology in symptomatic breast lesions: still an important diagnostic modality? Breast J 2012;18:103-110.
10.
Gerhard R, Schmitt FC: Liquid-based cytology in fine-needle aspiration of breast lesions: a review. Acta Cytol 2014;58:533-542.
11.
Eckert R, Howell LP: Number, size, and composition of cell clusters as related to breast FNA adequacy. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;21:105-111.
12.
Shabb NS, Boulos FI, Abdul-Karim FW: Indeterminate and erroneous fine-needle aspirates of breast with focus on the ‘true gray zone': a review. Acta Cytol 2013;57:316-331.
13.
Hasteh F, Pang Y, Pu R, Michael CW: Do we need more than one ThinPrep to obtain adequate cellularity in fine needle aspiration? Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:740-743.
14.
Lee KR, Foster RS, Papillo JL: Fine needle aspiration of the breast. Importance of the aspirator. Acta Cytol 1987;31:281-284.
15.
Ly TY, Barnes PJ, MacIntosh RF: Fine-needle aspiration cytology of mammary fibroadenoma: a comparison of ThinPrep (R) and Cytospin preparations. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:181-187.
16.
Kontzoglou K, Moulakakis KG, Konofaos P, Kyriazi M, Kyroudes A, Karakitsos P: The role of liquid-based cytology in the investigation of breast lesions using fine-needle aspiration: a cytohistopathological evaluation. J Surg Oncol 2005;89:75-78.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel
2015
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.