Cargando…

Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy

INTRODUCTION: Systemic amyloidosis (SA) has a broad nonspecific clinical presentation. Its diagnosis depends on identifying amyloid in tissues. Abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration (FPFNA) has been suggested as a sensitive and specific test for diagnosing SA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine F...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Halloush, Ruba A, Lavrovskaya, Elena, Mody, Dina R, Lager, Donna, Truong, Luan
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2822170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20165547
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1742-6413.58950
_version_ 1782177491005210624
author Halloush, Ruba A
Lavrovskaya, Elena
Mody, Dina R
Lager, Donna
Truong, Luan
author_facet Halloush, Ruba A
Lavrovskaya, Elena
Mody, Dina R
Lager, Donna
Truong, Luan
author_sort Halloush, Ruba A
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Systemic amyloidosis (SA) has a broad nonspecific clinical presentation. Its diagnosis depends on identifying amyloid in tissues. Abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration (FPFNA) has been suggested as a sensitive and specific test for diagnosing SA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine FPFNA from 38 patients (16 women and 20 men, age range 40–88 years) during a 15-year period were reviewed. Smears and cell blocks were stained with Congo red (CR). A panel of antibodies (serum amyloid protein, serum amyloid A, albumin, transthyretin, kappa light chain and lambda light chain) was used on six cell blocks from five patients. The FNA findings were correlated with clinical and histological follow-up. RESULTS: FPFNAs were positive, confirmed by CR in 5/39 (13%), suspicious in 1/39 (3%), negative in 28/39 (72%), and insufficient for diagnosis in 5/39 (13%) of cases. In all the positive cases, SA was confirmed within 2–16 weeks. Among the 28 negative cases, SA was diagnosed in 21, the rest were lost to follow-up. Among the insufficient cases, SA was diagnosed in four and one was lost to follow-up. Specificity was 100%, whereas sensitivity was 19%. SA typing using cell block sections was successful in three, un-interpretable in one, and negative in two cases. CONCLUSION: FPFNA for SA is not as good as previously reported. This may be due to different practice setting, level of experience, diagnostic technique, or absence of abdominal soft tissue involvement. A negative result of FPFNA does not exclude SA. Immune phenotyping of amyloid is possible on cell block.
format Text
id pubmed-2822170
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Medknow Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28221702010-02-17 Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy Halloush, Ruba A Lavrovskaya, Elena Mody, Dina R Lager, Donna Truong, Luan Cytojournal Original Article INTRODUCTION: Systemic amyloidosis (SA) has a broad nonspecific clinical presentation. Its diagnosis depends on identifying amyloid in tissues. Abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration (FPFNA) has been suggested as a sensitive and specific test for diagnosing SA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine FPFNA from 38 patients (16 women and 20 men, age range 40–88 years) during a 15-year period were reviewed. Smears and cell blocks were stained with Congo red (CR). A panel of antibodies (serum amyloid protein, serum amyloid A, albumin, transthyretin, kappa light chain and lambda light chain) was used on six cell blocks from five patients. The FNA findings were correlated with clinical and histological follow-up. RESULTS: FPFNAs were positive, confirmed by CR in 5/39 (13%), suspicious in 1/39 (3%), negative in 28/39 (72%), and insufficient for diagnosis in 5/39 (13%) of cases. In all the positive cases, SA was confirmed within 2–16 weeks. Among the 28 negative cases, SA was diagnosed in 21, the rest were lost to follow-up. Among the insufficient cases, SA was diagnosed in four and one was lost to follow-up. Specificity was 100%, whereas sensitivity was 19%. SA typing using cell block sections was successful in three, un-interpretable in one, and negative in two cases. CONCLUSION: FPFNA for SA is not as good as previously reported. This may be due to different practice setting, level of experience, diagnostic technique, or absence of abdominal soft tissue involvement. A negative result of FPFNA does not exclude SA. Immune phenotyping of amyloid is possible on cell block. Medknow Publications 2010-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2822170/ /pubmed/20165547 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1742-6413.58950 Text en © 2009 Halloush et al; licensee Cytopathology Foundation Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Halloush, Ruba A
Lavrovskaya, Elena
Mody, Dina R
Lager, Donna
Truong, Luan
Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title_full Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title_fullStr Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title_short Diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: The role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
title_sort diagnosis and typing of systemic amyloidosis: the role of abdominal fat pad fine needle aspiration biopsy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2822170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20165547
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1742-6413.58950
work_keys_str_mv AT halloushrubaa diagnosisandtypingofsystemicamyloidosistheroleofabdominalfatpadfineneedleaspirationbiopsy
AT lavrovskayaelena diagnosisandtypingofsystemicamyloidosistheroleofabdominalfatpadfineneedleaspirationbiopsy
AT modydinar diagnosisandtypingofsystemicamyloidosistheroleofabdominalfatpadfineneedleaspirationbiopsy
AT lagerdonna diagnosisandtypingofsystemicamyloidosistheroleofabdominalfatpadfineneedleaspirationbiopsy
AT truongluan diagnosisandtypingofsystemicamyloidosistheroleofabdominalfatpadfineneedleaspirationbiopsy