Diagnostic contribution of cytological specimens obtained from biopsies during gastrointestinal endoscopy in dogs and cats

Guillaume Ruiz, Lucas Verrot, Eve Laloy, Ghita Benchekroun

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

254 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives: The aims of this study were to compare cytological samples obtained from endoscopic biopsies using ‘imprint’ and ‘squash’ techniques, and to evaluate the potential value of cytology compared to histology in reaching the diagnosis.
Methods: Eighteen dogs and five cats undergoing endoscopy for chronic gastrointestinal signs were prospectively included. Imprint and squash samples were obtained from one biopsy and then analysed. Comparison between cytology and histology was performed using Cohen’s kappa coefficient.
Results: Appropriate samples for cytological evaluation were most often obtained with the squash technique (96% of the cases vs. 68% with the imprint technique). The diagnoses obtained with cytological samples and by histology, considered as the gold standard, were compared. The same diagnosis was obtained with the squash technique in 65% of the cases. Furthermore, cytology was considered complementary to histology for gastric spiral organisms and mast cells identification.
Clinical significance: These results suggest that squash cytology obtained from endoscopic biopsies of the gastrointestinal tract could provide relevant and additional information to histology in dogs and cats. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17–22
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Small Animal Practice
Volume58
Issue number1
Early online date9 Nov 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2017

Keywords

  • cytology
  • endoscopy
  • gastrointestinal tract
  • imprint
  • squash

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnostic contribution of cytological specimens obtained from biopsies during gastrointestinal endoscopy in dogs and cats'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this