BDTriPath液基细胞技术在485例非妇科细胞标本肿瘤细胞诊断的意义

目的探讨液基薄层细胞学制片技术（LCT）在非妇科细胞学诊断中的应用价值及临床意义。方法485例非妇科细胞学标本同时分别采用传统涂片法及液基薄层细胞学方法进行检查、阅片、诊断，将两组结果比较并进行统计学处理。结果LCT制片与传统涂片相比，前者细胞数量多且集中、薄层均匀、染色背景干净、核染色质着色鲜明、胞浆清楚、单个细胞界限分明，易于鉴别良恶性病变及肿瘤类型。传统涂片细胞核染色质着色均一模糊、缺乏立体感，染色背景欠清晰。普通涂片确诊癌50例（10．3％），可疑癌121例（24．9％），阴性314例（64．7％）；LCT制片确诊癌117例（24．1％），可疑癌113例（23，3％），阴性255例（52．6％）。结论LCT液基薄层细胞学制片技术在非妇科细胞学标本制片质量及诊断准确性明显高于传统涂片方法，两种制片方法的恶性细胞确诊率比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。

Significance of liquid - based cytology test on the tumour cytodiagnosis of 485 cases of non - gynecology cytological sample

Objective To investigate the applied value and clinical significance of gravitational settling style LCT in non - gynecology cytodiagnosis. Methods Four hundred and eighty - five cases of non - gynecology cytological sample were detected by routine smear test and LCT respectively, and then the accessing and diagnosis were made. At last statistical analysis was carried out to find the differences between the two methods. Results Comparing LCT with routine smear test, the difference had been found as follows. The former had higher quantity and more concentrated cell, more uniform papanicolaou smears, cleaner dyeing background, brighter color nuclear chromatin, more distinct endochylema, clearer single cell boundary, identifying benign lesion from malignant one and differentiating the category of tumor easierly. However, the nuclear chromatin of the latter was more monotonus, vague and less stereo, dyeing background was less cleaner. In these cases, the cases （percentage） of cancer, doubtful cancer and the negative were 50（ 10.3% ）, 121 （24.9%） and 314（64.7% ）, respectively, which were diagnosed by routine smear test. Correspondingly, the result of diagnosis made by LCT were 117 cases （24. 1% ）, 113 cases （ 23.3% ）, 255 cases（52.6% ）, respectively. Conclusions LCT was better than routine smear test in the quality of slice making and the accuracy of diagnosis on non - gynecology cytological sample, The difference of the two test in the rate of final diagnosis of malignant cell was significant （ P 〈 0.01 ）.