Methods: A total of five EBUS FNA cases from five


Methods: A total of five EBUS FNA cases from five

patients were identified in our records with a discrepancy SB203580 supplier between the rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) and final diagnosis, or that addressed a diagnostic dilemma. All of the cases had histological confirmation or follow-up. The cytomorphology in the direct smears, cell block, and immunohistochemical stains were reviewed, along with the clinical history and other available information. Results: Two cases were identified with a nondefinitive diagnosis at ROSE that were later diagnosed as malignant (metastatic signet-ring cell adenocarcinoma and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC)) on the final cytological diagnosis. Three additional cases were identified Liproxstatin-1 solubility dmso with a ROSE and final diagnosis of malignant (large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) and two squamous cell carcinomas), but raised important diagnostic dilemmas. These cases highlight the importance of recognizing discohesive malignant cells and bland neoplasms on EBUS FNA, which may lead to a negative

or a nondefinitive preliminary diagnosis. Neuroendocrine tumors can also be difficult due to the wide range of entities in the differential diagnosis, including benign lymphocytes, lymphomas, small and nonsmall cell carcinomas, and the lack of immunohistochemical stains at the time of ROSE. Finally, the background material in EBUS FNAs may be misleading and unrelated to the cells of interest. Conclusions: This study illustrates the cytomorphology of five EBUS FNA cases that address some of the diagnostic challenges witnessed while examining these specimens during ROSE. Many learn more of the difficulties faced can be attributed to the baseline cellularity of the aspirates, the bronchial contamination, the difficulty identifying neoplasms with bland cytology, the wide spectrum of diseases that

can occur in the mediastinum with overlapping cytomorphologic features, the mismatch between the background material and the cell populations present, and the overall unfamiliarity with these types of specimens.”
“Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a common oral mucosal disease that affects middle age patients. However, there are few reports about the incidence of OLP in different ethnic groups. The purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics of OLP in Thai and Croatian patients. Retrospective data were taken from medical records of 175 patients referred to the Oral Medicine Department of Chulalongkorn University and 175 patients referred to the School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb during the 19972007 period. In all patients the diagnosis of OLP was clinically and histopathologically confirmed. In Thai and Croatian OLP patients, females were predominant (the female to male ratio was 3:5:1).

Comments are closed.