Imprint cytology in the diagnosis of ovarian lesions

Sushma ., Sathibhai Panicker


Background:Ovarian neoplasms constitute a major bulk of surgical pathology specimens. Histopathology is the gold standard in diagnosis. Of the many options available for a rapid intra-operative diagnosis imprint cytology has many advantages. This study therefore aimed to study the imprint cytology of ovarian lesions and compare with the histopathology findings and analyze the statistical effectiveness of this study as a rapid intra-operative diagnostic tool.

Methods: 200 lesions resected over a 2 year period were included in the study. Lesions were bisected when fresh. Clean glass slides touched firmly over the representative areas. Immediate fixation was in 95% ethanol and staining was by Rapid Papanicolaou method. Of the 200 cases studied, 5 were lost to follow up, and hence were excluded from the study.

Results:The 195 cases were classified broadly according to WHO system into 4 groups and the lesions were statistically analyzed. 122 surface epithelial tumors showed 97.5%sensitivity and 94.5%specificity in diagnosis with an overall accuracy of 96.4%. 8 sex cord stromal tumors had 98.5% diagnostic accuracy with a specificity of 99.5%. There was 100 % sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing the 25 germ cell tumors. The tumor like lesions showed a diagnostic accuracy of 97% with a specificity of 100%.

Conclusions:Imprint cytology is an inexpensive and a fairly sensitive tool for rapid intra-operative diagnosis.



Imprint cytology, Intra-operative diagnosis, Ovarian lesions

Full Text:



Scopa CD, Melachrinou M, Bonikos D. Tissue imprints in surgical pathology – a rapid intraoperative diagnostic aid. Diagn Cytopathol. 1990;6(1):5–81.

Shidham VB, Dravid NV, Grover S, Kher AV. Role of scrape cytology in rapid intraoperative diagnosis : value and limitations. Acta Cytol. 1984;28(4):477-82

Helpap B, Tschubel K. Comparison between frozen section, histology and touch cytology of the breast: Fortschr Med. 1977;95(25)2119–20.

Abrams J, Steven G, Silverberg. The role of intraoperative cytology in the evaluation of gynaecologic diseases. Pathology Annual; 1989.

Souka S, Kamel M, Rocca M. El-Assi, Hebeishy N, Sheir SH. The combined use of cytological imprint and frozen section in the intra-operative diagnosis of ovarian tumors- International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 1990;31(1):43–6.

Michel CW, Lawrence WD, Bedrossian CW. Intraoperative consultation in ovarian lesion: a comparison between cytology and frozen section. Diagn Cytopathol. 1996;15(5):387–94.

Anastasiadis PG, Romanidis KN, Polichronidis A, Koutlaki NG, Tamiolakis D, Simopoulos K. The contribution of rapid intraoperative cytology to the improvement of ovarian cancer staging. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;86(3):244–9.

Khunamornpong S, Siriaunkgul S. Scrape cytology of the ovaries: Potential role in intraoperative consultation of ovarian lesions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2003;28(5):250–7.

WHO Classification of tumours- Tumours of the Breast and Female Genital Organs-2003.

Powers CN: Complications of fine needle aspiration biopsy; the reality behind the myths. In Schmidt W A ed; Cyto pathology, ASCP press, Chicago; 1996: 69–91.

Wojcik EM, Selvaggi SM. Fine needle aspiration cytology of Cystic ovarian lesions. Diagn.Cyto pathol. 11;1994:9–14

Higgins RV, Matkins JF, Marroum MC. Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytologic findings of ovarian cysts with ovarian histologic finding. Am J. Obstet Gynecol. 199;180(3):550-3.

Trope C: The preoperative diagnosis of malignancy of ovarian cysts: Neoplasma 28; 1981:117–21.

Kumari KC Usha. Imprints smears of ovarian tumors with histopathological correlation: Thesis submitted for MD pathology, University of Kerala, 1993.

Muller HA. Imprint cytology advantages and possibilities. Fortschr Med.1976;94(1):7-10.

Nguyen GK, Redburn J. Aspiration biopsy of granulosa cell tumor of the ovary: Cytologic findings and differential diagnosis – Diagn. Cytopathol. 8;1992: 253–57.

Hees K, de Jonge, JPA, von Kortz fleisch, DHJ: Dysgerminoma of ovary: Cytologic, histologic and electron microscopic study of a case. Acta Cytol. 35;1991:341–4.