Automated nuclear image morphometry on fine needle aspiration smears of malignant round cell tumors

Citation
U. Brahmi et al., Automated nuclear image morphometry on fine needle aspiration smears of malignant round cell tumors, ANAL QUAN C, 23(4), 2001, pp. 287-290
Citations number
8
Categorie Soggetti
Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
ANALYTICAL AND QUANTITATIVE CYTOLOGY AND HISTOLOGY
ISSN journal
08846812 → ACNP
Volume
23
Issue
4
Year of publication
2001
Pages
287 - 290
Database
ISI
SICI code
0884-6812(200108)23:4<287:ANIMOF>2.0.ZU;2-G
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze nuclear image morphometry in fine needle aspiration c ytology smears of different groups of malignant round cell tumors (MRCTs) t o evaluate its diagnostic role. STUDY DESIGN: In this study there were 55 cases of MRCT, consisting of 18 E wing's sarcoma (EW), 10 neuroblastoma (NB), 5 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma WHO, 6 rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), 4 peripheral neuroectodermal tumor (PNET), 8 Wilm' s tumor (WT), 2 retinoblastoma (RB) and 2 undifferentiated round cell tumor (URCT). A Leica image cytometer with Quantimet 600 software (Leica, Cambri dge, U.K) was used to measure nuclear area, nuclear diameter, nuclear perim eter, nuclear convex perimeter (CP), nuclear roundness and nuclear convex a rea on hematoxylin and eosin-stained cytologic smears. At least 100 cells w ere studied in each case. RESULTS: The RB group of tumors showed the highest mean nuclear area (NA), convex area (CA), CP, diameter (D),perimeter (P) and roundness (R). RMS had the highest mean CA, and URCT had the highest mean roundness. ANOVA was pe rformed on the tumors and showed significant differences for all the variab les in all the groups (P < .000). All the morphometric data (except roundne ss) were significantly different in RMS versus all other MRCTs except RB. S imilarly, morphometric data on WT were also significantly different from th at on NHL. Most of the morphometric data (except CA and R) showed significa nt differences between RB and all other MRCTs except RMS. PNET, EW and NB c ould not be differentiated with those variables. CONCLUSION: RMS and RB could successfully be differentiated from all other MRCTs with the help of morphometry. It was not possible to differentiate RM S and RB by image cytometry (ICM) since the ICM data overlapped in those tw o groups. It was possible to differentiate WT and NHL with ICM. Nuclear ICM was not significantly different in the NB, PNET and ES groups, and probabl y ICM would not be very helpful to differentiate these groups of MRCT.