ArticleCytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology2022
Deconvolution microscopy: A platform for rapid on-site evaluation of fine needle aspiration specimens that enables recovery of the sample.
Article in Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-time histological evaluation of gastrointestinal tissue using non-linear microscopy.Journal of clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Deconvolution microscopy: A platform for rapid on-site evaluation of fine needle aspiration specimens that enables recovery of the sample.Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextRapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) optimises the performance of cytology, but requires skilled handling, and smearing can make the material unavailable for some ancillary tests. There is a need to facilitate ROSE without sacrificing part of the sample.
objectiveWe evaluated the image quality of inexpensive deconvolution fluorescence microscopy for optically sectioning non-smeared fine needle aspiration (FNA) tissue fragments.
designA portion of residual material from 14 FNA samples was stained for 3 min in Hoechst 33342 and Sypro™ Red to label DNA and protein respectively, transferred to an imaging chamber, and imaged at 200× or 400× magnification at 1 micron intervals using a GE DeltaVision inverted fluorescence microscope. A deconvolution algorithm was applied to remove out-of-plane signal, and the resulting images were inverted and pseudocoloured to resemble H&E sections. Five cytopathologists blindly diagnosed 2 to 4 representative image stacks per case (total 70 evaluations), and later compared them to conventional epifluorescent images.
resultsAccurate definitive diagnoses were rendered in 45 (64%) of 70 total evaluations; equivocal diagnoses (atypical or suspicious) were made in 21 (30%) of the 70. There were two false positive and two false negative "definite" diagnoses in three cases (4/70; 6%). Cytopathologists preferred deconvolved images compared to raw images (P < 0.01). The imaged fragments were recovered and prepared into a ThinPrep or cell block without discernible alteration.
conclusionsDeconvolution improves image quality of FNA fragments compared to epifluorescence, often allowing definitive diagnosis while enabling the ROSE material to be subsequently triaged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.