RADIATION CHANGES IN ENDOCERVICAL CELLS IN BRUSH SPECIMENS

被引:3
作者
FRIERSON, HF
COVELL, JL
ANDERSEN, WA
机构
[1] Departments of Pathology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville, Virginia
关键词
Cytobrush; Cytology; Endocervical cells; Radiation therapy;
D O I
10.1002/dc.2840060404
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 [基础医学];
摘要
Although the cytologic changes in cervical and vaginal squamous cells after radiation therapy were well‐described decades ago, alterations in endocervical cells in response to radiation therapy have not been delineated in detail. We studied the effect of radiation therapy (usually combined linear accelerator beam and radium insertion) on endocervical cells as seen in endocervical brush specimens from 24 patients treated for cervical cancer. Of the 40 smears examined, 45 % were taken 3–6 mo after the completion of radiotherapy, 28% at 10–14 mo, and 20% at 18–34 mo. Endocervical cells appeared as single cells and in clusters and had lavender, mucin‐filled cytoplasm. When present in clusters, they lacked the honeycomb appearance of normal endocervical cells. In smears taken at 3–6 mo. the majority of endocervical cells were enlarged (100% of smears) but they usually had normal nuclear/cytoplasmic ratios. Their nuclei were enlarged (100% of smears); varied in size (100%); had some coarse chromatin (67%) and large nucleoli (78%); and were multinucleated (89%). Repair cells and multinucleated histiocytes were seen in 83% and 61% of smears, respectively, Each of these cytologic findings was less apparent in follow‐up smears taken more than 6 mo after the completion of radiation therapy. Awareness of these cytologic changes in endocervical cells after radiation therapy precludes the overdiagnosis of cancer in follow‐up endocervical brush specimens. Copyright © 1990 Wiley‐Liss, Inc., A Wiley Company
引用
收藏
页码:243 / 247
页数:5
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]
Graham RM, The effect of radiation on vaginal cells in cervical carcinoma, I. Description of cellular changes. Surg Gynecol Obstet, 84, pp. 153-165, (1947)
[2]
Trimbos JB, Arentz NPW, The efficiency of the cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells in cervical smears, Acta Cytol, 30, pp. 261-263, (1986)
[3]
Boon ME, Alons-van Kordelaar JJM, Rietveld-Scheffers PEM, Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology, Improvements in smear quality and detection rates. Acta Cytol, 30, pp. 264-270, (1986)
[4]
Taylor PT, Andersen WA, Barber SR, Covell JL, Smith EB, Underwood PB, The screening Papanicolaou smear: contribution of the endocervical brush, Obstet Gynecol, 70, pp. 734-738, (1987)
[5]
Kawaguchi K, Nogi M, Ohya M, Nishikawa Y, Kobayashi TK, The value of the cytobrush for obtaining cells from the uterine cervix, Diagn Cytopathol, 3, pp. 262-267, (1987)
[6]
Alons-van Kordelaar JJM, Boon ME, Diagnostic accuracy of squamous cervical lesions studied in spatula‐cytobrush smears, Acta Cytol, 32, pp. 801-804, (1988)
[7]
Andersen W, Frierson H, Barber S, Tabbarah S, Taylor P, Underwood P, Sensitivity and specificity of endocervical curettage and the endocervical brush for the evaluation of the endocervical canal, Am J Obstet Gynecol, 159, pp. 702-707, (1988)
[8]
Weitzman GA, Korhonen MO, Reeves KO, Irwin JF, Carter TS, Kaufman RH, Endocervical brush cytology, An alternative to endocervical curettage? J Reprod Med, 33, pp. 677-683, (1988)
[9]
Graham R, The cytologic diagnosis of cancer, pp. 149-184, (1963)
[10]
Gupta S, Gupta YN, Sanyal B, Radiation changes in vaginal and cervical cytology in carcinoma of the cervix uteri, J Surg Oncol, 19, pp. 71-73, (1982)