Cargando…
Deconvolution microscopy: A platform for rapid on‐site evaluation of fine needle aspiration specimens that enables recovery of the sample
CONTEXT: Rapid on‐site evaluation (ROSE) optimises the performance of cytology, but requires skilled handling, and smearing can make the material unavailable for some ancillary tests. There is a need to facilitate ROSE without sacrificing part of the sample. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the image quality...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9305921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35102620 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cyt.13106 |
Sumario: | CONTEXT: Rapid on‐site evaluation (ROSE) optimises the performance of cytology, but requires skilled handling, and smearing can make the material unavailable for some ancillary tests. There is a need to facilitate ROSE without sacrificing part of the sample. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the image quality of inexpensive deconvolution fluorescence microscopy for optically sectioning non‐smeared fine needle aspiration (FNA) tissue fragments. DESIGN: A portion of residual material from 14 FNA samples was stained for 3 min in Hoechst 33342 and Sypro™ Red to label DNA and protein respectively, transferred to an imaging chamber, and imaged at 200× or 400× magnification at 1 micron intervals using a GE DeltaVision inverted fluorescence microscope. A deconvolution algorithm was applied to remove out‐of‐plane signal, and the resulting images were inverted and pseudocoloured to resemble H&E sections. Five cytopathologists blindly diagnosed 2 to 4 representative image stacks per case (total 70 evaluations), and later compared them to conventional epifluorescent images. RESULTS: Accurate definitive diagnoses were rendered in 45 (64%) of 70 total evaluations; equivocal diagnoses (atypical or suspicious) were made in 21 (30%) of the 70. There were two false positive and two false negative “definite” diagnoses in three cases (4/70; 6%). Cytopathologists preferred deconvolved images compared to raw images (P < 0.01). The imaged fragments were recovered and prepared into a ThinPrep or cell block without discernible alteration. CONCLUSIONS: Deconvolution improves image quality of FNA fragments compared to epifluorescence, often allowing definitive diagnosis while enabling the ROSE material to be subsequently triaged. |
---|