The use of electron microscopy to refine diagnoses in the daily practice of cytopathology

Conceived as a screening tool, cytology is a field that since the 1980s has become more diagnostic in its scope. The advent of the fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is responsible for cytology's new place in pathology. In the everyday practice of cytopathology, about 85-90% of the nongynecologic cases can be diagnosed with the use of routine stains (i.e., Papanicolaou and Diff Quik). The other 10-15% of the cases require the use of ancillary diagnostic techniques for a precise diagnosis. Immunohistochemistry helps solve approximately 50% of these cases, and the other half of these challenging cases are best approached and diagnosed by using electron microscopy (EM). In their practice, the authors obtain cytologic samples for EM routinely in difficult cases. Unfortunately, a percentage of these cases collected for ultrastructural evaluation do not have enough cells after processing, and others only have a few diagnostic cells available. In the cases in which at least a handful of cells are available, EM is almost invariably helpful in one way or another, either making a definitive diagnosis or refining the diagnosis. A sampling of FNAB cases from the authors' everyday practice is prevented to illustrate the use of EM in the practice of cytopathology. The cases have been selected from among the most common diagnostic challenges to highlight the important role that ultrastructural evaluation plays in a busy cytology practice. In our practice ultrastructural evaluation is a piece of the puzzle, which, along with the clinical history, clinical impression, light microscopic/cytologic features, and other ancillary techniques (IHC, flow cytometry, and molecular pathology), help compile an accurate diagnosis. Many times EM is the most important component of the diagnostic algorithm.