OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of SurePath-liquid-based cytology (LBC) compared to conventional cytological preparations (CCP) in the identification of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: During a 13-month period, direct endometrial samples were collected from 120 patients using the Uterobrush. The material comprised 30 cases each of endometrial carcinoma, proliferative endometrium, secretory endometrium and atrophic endometrium. The following points were investigated:(i) the frequency of cell clumps in endometrial carcinoma; (ii) the area of cell nuclei; (iii) overlapping nuclei. RESULTS: (i) Comparison of the frequency of cell clumps with irregular protrusion pattern and papillo-tubular pattern showed no statistically significant difference in either type of cell clump between CCP and LBC. (ii) Comparison of the nuclear area of cells showed a sequential decrease from endometrial carcinoma to secretory endometrium, to proliferative endometrium and to atrophic endometrium, which was significant in CCP and LBC. (iii) Nuclear area was significantly lower with LBC compared with CCP in endometrial carcinoma, secretory endometrium and proliferative endometrium but not atrophic endometrium. (iv) Comparison of the degree of overlapping nuclei showed a sequential decrease from endometrial carcinoma to proliferative endometrium, to secretory endometrium and to atrophic endometrium, which was significant in both CCP and LBC. (v) Comparison of the degree of overlapping nuclei between CCP and LBC showed no significant difference for normal types of endometrium, but LBC had significantly higher values (P < 0.0001) in endometrial carcinoma than in CCP. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study revealed that applying diagnostic criteria used in CCP to LBC was easy to achieve, because LBC had excellent cytoarchitectural preservation and cells were well presented. Although we have not examined all cytological features of malignancy and have not considered atypical hyperplasia, we believe that this method may be a useful tool in the diagnosis of endometrial cytology.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of SurePath-liquid-based cytology (LBC) compared to conventional cytological preparations (CCP) in the identification of endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: During a 13-month period, direct endometrial samples were collected from 120 patients using the Uterobrush. The material comprised 30 cases each of endometrial carcinoma, proliferative endometrium, secretory endometrium and atrophic endometrium. The following points were investigated:(i) the frequency of cell clumps in endometrial carcinoma; (ii) the area of cell nuclei; (iii) overlapping nuclei. RESULTS: (i) Comparison of the frequency of cell clumps with irregular protrusion pattern and papillo-tubular pattern showed no statistically significant difference in either type of cell clump between CCP and LBC. (ii) Comparison of the nuclear area of cells showed a sequential decrease from endometrial carcinoma to secretory endometrium, to proliferative endometrium and to atrophic endometrium, which was significant in CCP and LBC. (iii) Nuclear area was significantly lower with LBC compared with CCP in endometrial carcinoma, secretory endometrium and proliferative endometrium but not atrophic endometrium. (iv) Comparison of the degree of overlapping nuclei showed a sequential decrease from endometrial carcinoma to proliferative endometrium, to secretory endometrium and to atrophic endometrium, which was significant in both CCP and LBC. (v) Comparison of the degree of overlapping nuclei between CCP and LBC showed no significant difference for normal types of endometrium, but LBC had significantly higher values (P < 0.0001) in endometrial carcinoma than in CCP. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study revealed that applying diagnostic criteria used in CCP to LBC was easy to achieve, because LBC had excellent cytoarchitectural preservation and cells were well presented. Although we have not examined all cytological features of malignancy and have not considered atypical hyperplasia, we believe that this method may be a useful tool in the diagnosis of endometrial cytology.