When diagnosing cytological specimens, perfect conclusions are determined by the preparation method used. An appropriate method is one that minimizes cell loss and preserves morphological details (Sunsaneevithayami et al. 100). Smear and cytospin have major similarities when identifying gynecological defects from peritoneal fluid samples. When cytospin is not available direct is used to serve the purpose. Smear resulted in the best overall results that were observed.Smear gave out results with better sensitivity and low wrong rates as opposed to cytospin. However a major issue likely to be experienced when a smear is done poorly is, the results can be interpretable therefore not easy to understand. This can be solved by having an expert in cytotechnology organizing the smears. According to the study by Sunsaneevithayami et al. (102), smear improves single cells details and therefore results a good nuclear view. In cytospin important information is lost leading to innacurate diagnosis.
The immunochemical stain was of great use for detecting breast cancer cells in the blood sample. This technique detected regions of metastases that haemotoxylin was unable to detect.
According to Packeisen, J. (613), the most assuring method for improving the quality of resultsis through using the tissue microarray technique which is a tool for internal quality control. Using this technique improved the understanding of immunohistochemical (IHC) staining of more than 20 different antigens.
The direct method is time saving. It involves a labeled antibody that is attached to the antigen. On the other hand, the indirect immunohistochemical uses two antibodies. The first antibody is attached against the antigen and a labeled secondary antibody. This makes indirect method effective because the signal is amplified by attaching the two antibodies (Chen et al.7)
Chen, Xiao et al. “Double Staining Immunohistochemistry.”North American Journal of Medical Sciences, 2.5 (2010); 241-245.
Packeisen, J. et al. “Tissue Microarrays: A New approach for Quality control in Immunohistochemistry.” Journal of clinical Pathology, 55 (2002) 613-615. Print.
Sunsaneevithyayami, Prasert et al. “Comparison of Direct Smear and Cytospin of Peritoneal Fluid Zampliongs in the diagnosis of Gynacological Malignancies.” Siraj Medical Journal, 48.2 (1996): 100-102. Print.