HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by JADHON, M. E. Articles by MIKUTA, J. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by JADHON, M. E. Articles by MIKUTA, J. J.

Cytologic Smears of Peritoneal Surfaces as a Sampling Technique in Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma

From the Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Abstract

Ovarian carcinoma disseminates primarily through the shedding of cells into the peritoneal cavity and subsequent implantation onto peritoneal surfaces. Accurate evaluation of the extent of disease is important both at initial surgical evaluation for staging and at second-look operations to determine the necessity of further therapy. Techniques used for such assessment include node sampling, peritoneal washings, and random biopsies of peritoneal surfaces. Although random biopsies are used by some, others have found them to be of negligible value in the absence of gross disease. The use of cytologic smears of peritoneal surfaces offers a simple method by which cells from a large surface area may be evaluated, and uses equipment readily available to the gynecologist. We compared results of 125 cytologic smears with washings and biopsy specimens obtained during 33 laparotomies for ovarian carcinoma. Cytologic smears identified disease in 48 of 125 sites, whereas biopsy identified only 29 areas of disease. Thirteen of the positive Papanicolaou smears were obtained from clinically diseasefree areas. Although the cytologic evaluation of the parietal peritoneal surfaces was more frequently positive than were biopsy specimens, each method identified disease in 16 patients when paired with standard techniques of examination and washing. We conclude that the peritoneal cytologic smear offers an alternative method of further evaluating the extent of disease, particularly when no gross evidence of extraovarian disease is detected.