Touch Impression Cytology Versus Frozen Section as Intraoperative Consultation Diagnosis

The efficacy of Touch Imprint Cytology in the diagnosis of various pathological processes was evaluated and compared with Frozen Section in intraoperative consultation. We examined 60 cases from various sites of the body that were referred for intraoperative consultation. All cases were analyzed by Touch Imprint Cytology followed by Frozen section. We found diagnostic accuracy of both procedures comparable. The diagnostic accuracy in distinguishing benign from malignant lesions by combined procedures was 100%. There were no false positive or false negative cases. For diagnosing specific subtypes of malignancy, the diagnostic accuracy of each method alone was 96.6% with a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 100% and the combined sensitivity 90%. Touch Imprint Cytology provided better cellular morphology and fewer artifacts. On the other hand Frozen Sections provided more tissue architectural details but frequently hampered by freezing artifacts. We conclude that both Touch Imprint Cytology and Frozen Sections are dependable intraoperative consultation diagnostic modalities. Touch Imprint Cytology alone may provide a correct diagnosis in vast majority of cases with minimal expense and without the need of sophisticated cryostat machine thus making it quite suitable for many hospitals where cryostat machines are not available.