R Bokun1. 1. Institute of Pathology, Military Medical Academy, Beograd, Yugoslavia. btodoric@hotmail.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to show that imprint cytology is a valuable method in the evaluation of bone tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-six surgical specimens of bone tumors imprints were air-dried and stained by the May-Grunwald-Giemsa method. A cytologist gave a detailed description of the smears, concluded whether the lesion was benign or malignant and suggested a final diagnosis. Results were compared with the corresponding histopathologic diagnoses. RESULTS: In 2 cases the material was too scarce for cytologic diagnosis. Out of 19 cases with primary malignant bone tumors the cytologist recognized malignancy in 18 of them and in 10 suggested the final diagnosis. In 14 patients with metastases (11 with squamous-cell carcinoma, 1 with anaplastic carcinoma, 2 with malignant melanoma) the cytologic and histopathologic diagnoses correlated in all cases. In 21 patients with benign bone lesions, the cytologist defined as benign 19 of them and in one case had suspicion of fibrosarcoma. In one patient with a histopathologic diagnosis of bone necrosis, groups of clearly malignant cells were found in the imprint. After revision of the case, the cytologist confirmed the diagnosis of malignancy. CONCLUSION: Cytological analysis of the imprints of bone lesions is valuable for an early orientation of the clinicians. It is very important, since the final histopathologic diagnosis needs time because of the decalcification procedure.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to show that imprint cytology is a valuable method in the evaluation of bone tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-six surgical specimens of bone tumors imprints were air-dried and stained by the May-Grunwald-Giemsa method. A cytologist gave a detailed description of the smears, concluded whether the lesion was benign or malignant and suggested a final diagnosis. Results were compared with the corresponding histopathologic diagnoses. RESULTS: In 2 cases the material was too scarce for cytologic diagnosis. Out of 19 cases with primary malignant bone tumors the cytologist recognized malignancy in 18 of them and in 10 suggested the final diagnosis. In 14 patients with metastases (11 with squamous-cell carcinoma, 1 with anaplastic carcinoma, 2 with malignant melanoma) the cytologic and histopathologic diagnoses correlated in all cases. In 21 patients with benign bone lesions, the cytologist defined as benign 19 of them and in one case had suspicion of fibrosarcoma. In one patient with a histopathologic diagnosis of bone necrosis, groups of clearly malignant cells were found in the imprint. After revision of the case, the cytologist confirmed the diagnosis of malignancy. CONCLUSION: Cytological analysis of the imprints of bone lesions is valuable for an early orientation of the clinicians. It is very important, since the final histopathologic diagnosis needs time because of the decalcification procedure.