Impression cytology of the healthy equine ocular surface: Inter-observer agreement, filter preservation over time and comparison with the cytobrush technique.
Abstract: The cytobrush technique is commonly used to sample the equine ocular surface. Impression cytology (IC) is an innovative noninvasive method, which allows for the collection of superficial layers of ocular epithelium. Objective: The aims of this study were to compare the cytobrush and IC techniques on healthy equine ocular surfaces, to assess the agreement between observers with different levels of expertise, and to test the preservability of filters over time. Methods: Twenty-four horses were sampled within 10 minutes of slaughter using IC on the left eye and the cytobrush technique on the right eye. May-Grünwald-Giemsa stained specimens were evaluated by two observers with different levels of expertise. Morphologic features were evaluated using a 4-grade system. The IC samples were re-evaluated after 6 months to examine filter preservation. Results: In IC samples, corneal and conjunctival cells were clearly separated. Goblet cells were found in five and 17 filters by observer 1 and 2, respectively. Using the cytobrush technique, corneal and conjunctival cells were present but mixed. Goblet cell cellularity, preservation, and enumeration were higher with the IC technique compared with the cytobrush technique (P = 0.013; P = 0.004; P = 0.031, respectively). The inter-observer agreement for the IC technique was moderate to fair. In 7/24 IC samples re-evaluated after 6 months, cellular morphology was impaired, and the overall score was significantly lower. Conclusions: IC is an innovative noninvasive method, which allows for sample collection with higher cellularity and preservation. Moreover, the identification of goblet cells is easier. For these reasons, IC could be interesting and useful as a complementary diagnostic cytologic method in clinical practice.
© 2019 American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology.
Publication Date: 2019-03-12 PubMed ID: 30861155DOI: 10.1111/vcp.12711Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Comparative Study
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research paper investigates the effectiveness of Impression Cytology (IC), a non-invasive method for collecting superficial layers of ocular epithelium, in comparison with the commonly used cytobrush technique. The study found that IC obtains higher cellularity and preservation, making it a helpful supplementary diagnostic cytological method.
Research Objective
- The study primarily aimed to compare IC and the cytobrush techniques for sampling the ocular surface of healthy horses, with attention towards observer agreement and filter preservation over time.
Methods Used
- The study was conducted on twenty-four horses, sampled within ten minutes of slaughter. IC was used on the left eye, while the cytobrush technique was employed on the right eye.
- May-Grünwald-Giemsa stained specimens were evaluated by two observers of varying expertise, with morphologic features assessed using a 4-grade system.
- IC samples were revisited after six months to examine filter preservation.
Findings
- IC samples had clearly separated corneal and conjunctival cells. The number of goblet cells found varied between the two observers.
- The cytobrush technique also collected corneal and conjunctival cells, but they were mixed.
- Cellularity, preservation, and enumeration were higher in IC samples compared to those obtained from the cytobrush technique (P=0.013; P=0.004; P=0.031 respectively).
- The agreement between observers was average to below average for the IC technique.
- Upon reassessment after six months, 7 out of 24 IC samples showed impaired cellular morphology and a significantly lower overall score.
Conclusion
- As an innovative non-invasive method, IC offers superior sample collection in terms of cellularity and preservation.
- The method also enhances the ease of identification of goblet cells.
- Considering these benefits, IC shows potential for adoption as a supplementary diagnostic cytological procedure in clinical practice.
Cite This Article
APA
Bonsembiante F, Perazzi A, Deganello A, Gelain ME, Iacopetti I.
(2019).
Impression cytology of the healthy equine ocular surface: Inter-observer agreement, filter preservation over time and comparison with the cytobrush technique.
Vet Clin Pathol, 48(1), 61-66.
https://doi.org/10.1111/vcp.12711 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, Production and Health, University of Padua, Viale dell'Università, Legnaro (Padua), Italy.
- Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health, University of Padua, Viale dell'Università, Legnaro (Padua), Italy.
- Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health, University of Padua, Viale dell'Università, Legnaro (Padua), Italy.
- Department of Comparative Biomedicine and Food Science, Production and Health, University of Padua, Viale dell'Università, Legnaro (Padua), Italy.
- Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health, University of Padua, Viale dell'Università, Legnaro (Padua), Italy.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Cornea / anatomy & histology
- Cornea / cytology
- Cytological Techniques / instrumentation
- Cytological Techniques / methods
- Cytological Techniques / veterinary
- Horses / anatomy & histology
- Observer Variation
- Specimen Handling / veterinary
Citations
This article has been cited 2 times.- Kovalcuka L, Sarpio L, Nikolajenko M. Comparison of five conjunctival cytology sampling methods in normal cat eyes. Vet World 2023 Apr;16(4):779-785.
- Berzina I, Terentjeva A, Kovalcuka L. Difference in cytological findings of healthy and conjunctivitis/keratoconjunctivitis affected canine eyes between variably experienced evaluators. Vet World 2022 Jul;15(7):1852-1856.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
