LIQUID BASED OR CONVENTIONAL? A CYTOLOGICAL INSIGHT INTO BREAST FNAC

Abstract Background: Breast lesions range from benign to malignant, requiring accurate diagnostic methods. FNAC is a safe and cost-effective initial diagnostic tool for evaluating breast masses. Traditionally, conventional smears have been regarded as the gold standard in cytological assessment of breast lesions. Multiple smears are typically prepared from the aspirated material. However, cytologists often find slide screening to be labor-intensive and exhausting. The challenge is further intensified by technical limitations such as poor smear preparation and sub-optimal fixation, which can compromise the preservation of cellular details. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of LBC in breast FNAC by comparing with conventional smears. Methodology: A total of 100 cases were studies. Both conventional and Liquid based cytology smears were prepared. The conventional and LBC smears were evaluated by two separate Pathologists and scoring was done on the parameters like cellularity, background blood/debris, informative background, monolayer spread, nuclear details, and cytoplasmic details. Results: The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between LBC and conventional smears in terms of providing informative background and preserving cytoarchitecture. However, LBC showed higher cellularity, reduced background blood and debris, improved formation of monolayers, and enhanced nuclear and cytoplasmic details over conventional cytology. Conclusion: Based on the findings of this study, we conclude that LBC can initially serve as a complementary technique alongside conventional breast FNA. As cytopathologists become more familiar with the cytomorphological features unique to LBC, it holds the potential to eventually replace conventional smears, much like its established role in cervical cytology.