P Gupta1, N Gupta1, P Dey1. 1. Department of Cytology and Gynaecologic Pathology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exfoliated endometrial cells can be seen in cervical smears in association with a wide variety of conditions ranging from normal proliferative endometrium to endometrial malignancies. It is often difficult to differentiate between benign, atypical and malignant endometrial cells using cytomorphology alone. This study was conducted to evaluate if morphometric analysis of endometrial nuclei on liquid-based cervical samples could be of help in differentiating between these endometrial cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of cervical samples with histopathological correlation were selected: Group A: showing benign endometrial cells; Group B: showing atypical endometrial cells and Group C: showing malignant endometrial cells. There were 30 cases each in Group A and B and 39 cases in Group C. Image J, NIH, USA was used for selecting the endometrial nuclei and performing the morphometric measurements. MANOVA was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The mean nuclear area and nuclear perimeter were significantly different between the three groups of endometrial cells with a P-value <0.05. However, the mean standard deviation of the nuclear area (SDNA) was not significantly different between atypical and malignant endometrial cells (P = 0.765) and the mean nuclear diameter was not statistically different between benign and atypical cells (P = 0.112). Also, the difference in the mean integrated gray density amongst all three groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.397, 0.844, 0.732). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the morphometric parameters of the nuclear area and nuclear perimeter are helpful in differentiating between benign, atypical and malignant endometrial nuclei even in liquid-based cervical cytology samples.
BACKGROUND: Exfoliated endometrial cells can be seen in cervical smears in association with a wide variety of conditions ranging from normal proliferative endometrium to endometrial malignancies. It is often difficult to differentiate between benign, atypical and malignant endometrial cells using cytomorphology alone. This study was conducted to evaluate if morphometric analysis of endometrial nuclei on liquid-based cervical samples could be of help in differentiating between these endometrial cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three groups of cervical samples with histopathological correlation were selected: Group A: showing benign endometrial cells; Group B: showing atypical endometrial cells and Group C: showing malignant endometrial cells. There were 30 cases each in Group A and B and 39 cases in Group C. Image J, NIH, USA was used for selecting the endometrial nuclei and performing the morphometric measurements. MANOVA was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The mean nuclear area and nuclear perimeter were significantly different between the three groups of endometrial cells with a P-value <0.05. However, the mean standard deviation of the nuclear area (SDNA) was not significantly different between atypical and malignant endometrial cells (P = 0.765) and the mean nuclear diameter was not statistically different between benign and atypical cells (P = 0.112). Also, the difference in the mean integrated gray density amongst all three groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.397, 0.844, 0.732). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the morphometric parameters of the nuclear area and nuclear perimeter are helpful in differentiating between benign, atypical and malignant endometrial nuclei even in liquid-based cervical cytology samples.