Premium
Diagnostic role of fine‐needle aspiration of pancreatic allograft to detect rejection
Author(s) -
Sariya Dinesh,
Kluskens Larry,
Assad Lina,
Treaba Diana,
Reddy Vijaya,
Gattuso Paolo
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
diagnostic cytopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.417
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1097-0339
pISSN - 8755-1039
DOI - 10.1002/dc.10179
Subject(s) - medicine , fine needle aspiration , biopsy , radiology , sampling (signal processing) , cytology , cytopathology , lymphoblast , pathology , genetics , filter (signal processing) , biology , computer science , computer vision , cell culture
The purpose of this study was to assess whether the same principles to evaluate renal transplant by fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) for rejection could be applied to pancreatic allograft. Between 1996–1998, 25 ultrasound‐guided FNAs on 13 patients with pancreatic allograft were performed and ThinPrep® made. The percentage of lymphocytes, lymphoblasts, monocytes, eosinophils, plasma cells, immunoblasts, and macrophages were calculated. Simultaneous peripheral smear was obtained and “total corrected increment” score calculated. Subsequent core biopsy was available in six patients. A total of seven FNAs on three patients were inadequate because of insufficient epithelial cells. No evidence of rejection reported in nine patients was confirmed on biopsy in five patients. One patient reported as suspicious later showed rejection on biopsy. Thus, FNA may be used to monitor the graft status with faster turnaround times. Rejection may be a focal process and FNA may be used for sampling multiple sites. Cytologic diagnosis fairly accurately detects early rejection. Core biopsies are warranted in unsatisfactory specimens and when FNA is suspicious for rejection. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2002;27:266–270. © 2002 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.