Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides
Nasal cytology is a precious tool to study nasal disorders, but in current literature, there is no consensus on the standardization of the processing procedure of the obtained samples. Therefore, we decided to test on specimens obtained by nasal scraping, a common way of nasal specimen sampling, two...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | Mediators of Inflammation |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1640180 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832563635586596864 |
|---|---|
| author | Maria Laura Bartoli Lodovica Cristofani-Mencacci Mariella Scarano Andrea Nacci Manuela Latorre Elena Bacci Pierluigi Paggiaro Veronica Seccia |
| author_facet | Maria Laura Bartoli Lodovica Cristofani-Mencacci Mariella Scarano Andrea Nacci Manuela Latorre Elena Bacci Pierluigi Paggiaro Veronica Seccia |
| author_sort | Maria Laura Bartoli |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Nasal cytology is a precious tool to study nasal disorders, but in current literature, there is no consensus on the standardization of the processing procedure of the obtained samples. Therefore, we decided to test on specimens obtained by nasal scraping, a common way of nasal specimen sampling, two different processing techniques, smear and cytocentrifugation, and compare them in terms of inflammatory cell content, quality of slides, and validity on clinical assessment. We analyzed 105 patients with suspected sinonasal diseases, and in each patient, we performed nasal cytology with both techniques. Our analysis showed a good correlation between the two techniques for neutrophil and eosinophil percentages, both returned well-preserved cells, and showed higher neutrophil percentage in males and in smokers and higher eosinophil percentage in patients with polyposis, with a good concordance with clinical symptoms, as measured by a specific disease-related questionnaire (Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22). Technically speaking, smeared slides were easier to prepare, with no need of dedicated equipment, but cell distribution was better in cytocentrifuged slides allowing shorter reading time. In conclusion, both techniques can be considered superimposable and worthy to be used. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-5e81630a3994444da2b003e40a655d5d |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 0962-9351 1466-1861 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Mediators of Inflammation |
| spelling | doaj-art-5e81630a3994444da2b003e40a655d5d2025-02-03T01:12:58ZengWileyMediators of Inflammation0962-93511466-18612018-01-01201810.1155/2018/16401801640180Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged SlidesMaria Laura Bartoli0Lodovica Cristofani-Mencacci1Mariella Scarano2Andrea Nacci3Manuela Latorre4Elena Bacci5Pierluigi Paggiaro6Veronica Seccia7Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Department, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy1st Otorhinolaryngology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy1st Otorhinolaryngology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, ItalyENT, Audiology and Phoniatric Unit, Department of Neurosciences, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, ItalyCardio-Thoracic and Vascular Department, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, ItalyCardio-Thoracic and Vascular Department, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, ItalyCardio-Thoracic and Vascular Department, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, Italy1st Otorhinolaryngology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, Via Paradisa 2, 56124 Pisa, ItalyNasal cytology is a precious tool to study nasal disorders, but in current literature, there is no consensus on the standardization of the processing procedure of the obtained samples. Therefore, we decided to test on specimens obtained by nasal scraping, a common way of nasal specimen sampling, two different processing techniques, smear and cytocentrifugation, and compare them in terms of inflammatory cell content, quality of slides, and validity on clinical assessment. We analyzed 105 patients with suspected sinonasal diseases, and in each patient, we performed nasal cytology with both techniques. Our analysis showed a good correlation between the two techniques for neutrophil and eosinophil percentages, both returned well-preserved cells, and showed higher neutrophil percentage in males and in smokers and higher eosinophil percentage in patients with polyposis, with a good concordance with clinical symptoms, as measured by a specific disease-related questionnaire (Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22). Technically speaking, smeared slides were easier to prepare, with no need of dedicated equipment, but cell distribution was better in cytocentrifuged slides allowing shorter reading time. In conclusion, both techniques can be considered superimposable and worthy to be used.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1640180 |
| spellingShingle | Maria Laura Bartoli Lodovica Cristofani-Mencacci Mariella Scarano Andrea Nacci Manuela Latorre Elena Bacci Pierluigi Paggiaro Veronica Seccia Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides Mediators of Inflammation |
| title | Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides |
| title_full | Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides |
| title_fullStr | Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides |
| title_full_unstemmed | Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides |
| title_short | Nasal Cytology: A Comparative Study of Two Different Techniques of Processing—Smeared versus Cytocentrifuged Slides |
| title_sort | nasal cytology a comparative study of two different techniques of processing smeared versus cytocentrifuged slides |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/1640180 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marialaurabartoli nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT lodovicacristofanimencacci nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT mariellascarano nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT andreanacci nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT manuelalatorre nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT elenabacci nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT pierluigipaggiaro nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides AT veronicaseccia nasalcytologyacomparativestudyoftwodifferenttechniquesofprocessingsmearedversuscytocentrifugedslides |