The advantages of using cytospins of uterine lavage fluid for the diagnosis of equine endometritis.
Abstract: Uterine lavage (UL) is a routine diagnostic procedure for endometritis. In UL the fluid is centrifuged and the sediment smeared. Samples prepared in cytocentrifuges, the so-called "cytospins", are useful for evaluating cells in fluids, but never been used in UL. The aim of this study was to assess the usefulness of cytospins after UL, comparing automatic versus manual cytocentrifuges, and to determine their value for the diagnosis of endometritis. The study was divided in two parts. Firstly, UL was performed in 16 mares and a small part of the retrieved fluid was cytocentrifuged in an automatic (PreCyto) and manual (PreMan) cytocentrifuge, whereas the remaining fluid was centrifuged. After that, the sediment was divided into three quotas. One quota was smeared, one was processed in an automatic cytocentrifuge (PostCyto) and the last quota was cytospinned in a manual apparatus (PostMan). Cytospins obtained were scored for cellularity, cell preservation, presence of inflammatory cells, bacteria and contaminants; results were compared with sediment smears. Secondly in this study, the best cytospin method was compared with sediment smears in another group of 13 mares, which had endometrial biopsy after UL. Agreement between sediment smears and cytospins was poor to moderate. Compared to sediment smears, cytospins were more cellular, with better morphological details. Urine crystals and fecal contamination were detected more often in cytospins (especially PostCyto and PostMan). No differences in the percentage of inflammatory or epithelial cells existed. PostMan was considered the best method to evaluate UL fluid and it had higher sensitivity (80%), compared with sediment smears (60%), for diagnosing endometritis. Cytocentrifugation offers significant advantages over sediment smears and the manual cytocentrifuge is well suited for horse stable conditions.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Publication Date: 2020-05-21 PubMed ID: 32619814DOI: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2020.05.008Google 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.
- 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 article looks into the benefits of using ‘cytospins’, or processed cell samples from uterine lavage, in diagnosing equine endometritis. The study examines how manual and automatic cytospins compare and evaluate their effectiveness in disease identification.
Understanding the Research Process
- The study involved two parts. The initial part used 16 mares undergoing a ‘utrine lavage’ (UL) procedure, a common diagnostic technique for endometritis. The retrieved fluid was cytocentrifuged (separated by density through spinning) in both automatic and manual devices. The remained part of the liquid was subject to centrifugation, and the sediment was divided into three parts. These were examined and analysed based on cellularity, cell preservation, presence of inflammatory cells, bacteria, and contaminants.
- The second part of the research involved comparing the most successful cytospin method discovered in the first part of the study (manual) with sediment smears in 13 additional mares that underwent UL.
Key Findings
- Failings in agreements were observed between sediment smear and cytospin results; they ranged from poor to moderate. Compared to sediment smear, cytospin results were found to be more cellular and provided superior morphological details.
- It was noted that contaminants were frequently detected in the cytospin samples, particularly urine crystals and faecal contamination. However, no significant differences in the presence of inflammatory or epithelial cells were observed.
- The manual cytospin method (PostMan) proved more effective in examining the UL fluid and showed higher sensitivity in diagnosing endometritis. Pertaining to the sensitivity of the methods, the PostMan was rated at 80%, while sediment smears stood at 60%.
- The study concluded that the manual cytocentrifugation method had significant advantages over sediment smears for lavage fluid evaluation. This method was deemed suitable for the conditions of horse stables.
Cite This Article
APA
Marcos R, Ribeiro T, Santos M, Correia-Gomes C, Macedo S, Guimarães T, Blielbernicht M, Caniatti M, Rocha A.
(2020).
The advantages of using cytospins of uterine lavage fluid for the diagnosis of equine endometritis.
Theriogenology, 154, 143-151.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2020.05.008 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Cytology Diagnostic Services, Laboratory of Histology and Embryology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, University of Porto (ICBAS-UP), Portugal. Electronic address: rmarcos@icbas.up.pt.
- Animal Reproduction Center of Vairão, ICBAS-UP, Portugal.
- Cytology Diagnostic Services, Laboratory of Histology and Embryology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, University of Porto (ICBAS-UP), Portugal.
- Epidemiology Research Unit, Department of Veterinary and Animal Science, Northern Faculty, Scotland's Rural College (SRUC), United Kingdom.
- Animal Reproduction Center of Vairão, ICBAS-UP, Portugal.
- Animal Reproduction Center of Vairão, ICBAS-UP, Portugal.
- EmbrioVet, Salvaterra de Magos, Portugal.
- DIMEVET Dipartimento di Medicina Veterinaria, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
- Animal Reproduction Center of Vairão, ICBAS-UP, Portugal.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Centrifugation / veterinary
- Endometritis / diagnosis
- Endometritis / veterinary
- Endometrium
- Female
- Horse Diseases / diagnosis
- Horses
- Therapeutic Irrigation / veterinary
Conflict of Interest Statement
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Citations
This article has been cited 0 times.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