CERTIFICATE

IMPACT FACTOR 2021

Subject Area

  • Life Sciences / Biology
  • Architecture / Building Management
  • Asian Studies
  • Business & Management
  • Chemistry
  • Computer Science
  • Economics & Finance
  • Engineering / Acoustics
  • Environmental Science
  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Pharmaceutical Sciences
  • General Sciences
  • Materials Science
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Nanotechnology & Nanoscience
  • Nonlinear Science
  • Chaos & Dynamical Systems
  • Physics
  • Social Sciences & Humanities

Why Us? >>

  • Open Access
  • Peer Reviewed
  • Rapid Publication
  • Life time hosting
  • Free promotion service
  • Free indexing service
  • More citations
  • Search engine friendly

Implementation of cell block technique on fine needle aspiration from liver disease

Author: 
Dr. Yasir Hakim
Subject Area: 
Health Sciences
Abstract: 

Objectives: The study was conducted in Dar Al Uloom University during the period (June - August 2017 ) to assess the implementation of cell block technique in the diagnosis of liver disease based on specimen adequacy and diagnostic accuracy, to evaluate the level of background staining, cellularity, nuclear, cytoplasmic preservation in cell block section, to compare the differences between the diagnostic results of cell block slides, conventional smears and to explore the feasibility of the use of cell block preparation in routine cytology. Methods: Eighty study subject were selected for the study, ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration was obtained from liver, then aspirate cells fixed in 40% formalin overnight, the supernatant fluid was decanted and settle cells warped in filter paper and then placed in a tissue cassette. All tissue cassette processed in an automatic tissue processor, the cell block were embedded in paraffin wax, and 4-6 micron were cut using standard rotary microtome. The sections were stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) stain and cover with cover slip using DPX mounting media, and cytological smears was also stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin stain. Results: The result obtained that the high score (+3) in smear 41(51.3%) while in cell block 27(33.8%). Moreover when compared the final architecture preservation which include nuclear and cytoplasmic preservation, the nuclear preservation were the best by cytological smears than cell blocks, score (+3) in smears 43(53.8%) while in cell block 37(46.3%). In the comparison of cytoplasmic preservation between the two methods found that the cytological smears was the best, the high score (+3)42 (52.5%) while in cell block 35(43.8%) comparing to the background staining found that the cell block has mild background staining 55(68.8%) while smears 7(8.8%) Conclusion: In this study smear preparation was the best in comparison with cell block technique in preservation of cells, nucleus and cytoplasm of liver disease.

PDF file: 

CALL FOR PAPERS

 

ONLINE PAYPAL PAYMENT

IJMCE RECOMMENDATION

Advantages of IJCR

  • Rapid Publishing
  • Professional publishing practices
  • Indexing in leading database
  • High level of citation
  • High Qualitiy reader base
  • High level author suport

Plagiarism Detection

IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.

 

EDITORIAL BOARD

CHUDE NKIRU PATRICIA
Nigeria
Dr. Swamy KRM
India
Dr. Abdul Hannan A.M.S
Saudi Arabia.
Luai Farhan Zghair
Iraq
Hasan Ali Abed Al-Zu’bi
Jordanian
Fredrick OJIJA
Tanzanian
Firuza M. Tursunkhodjaeva
Uzbekistan
Faraz Ahmed Farooqi
Saudi Arabia
Eric Randy Reyes Politud
Philippines
Elsadig Gasoom FadelAlla Elbashir
Sudan
Eapen, Asha Sarah
United State
Dr.Arun Kumar A
India
Dr. Zafar Iqbal
Pakistan
Dr. SHAHERA S.PATEL
India
Dr. Ruchika Khanna
India
Dr. Recep TAS
Turkey
Dr. Rasha Ali Eldeeb
Egypt
Dr. Pralhad Kanhaiyalal Rahangdale
India
DR. PATRICK D. CERNA
Philippines
Dr. Nicolas Padilla- Raygoza
Mexico
Dr. Mustafa Y. G. Younis
Libiya
Dr. Muhammad shoaib Ahmedani
Saudi Arabia
DR. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL MOHMAND
United State
DR. MAHESH SHIVAJI CHAVAN
India
DR. M. ARUNA
India
Dr. Lim Gee Nee
Malaysia
Dr. Jatinder Pal Singh Chawla
India
DR. IRAM BOKHARI
Pakistan
Dr. FARHAT NAZ RAHMAN
Pakistan
Dr. Devendra kumar Gupta
India
Dr. ASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY
India
Dr. Ali Seidi
Iran
Dr. Achmad Choerudin
Indonesia
Dr Ashok Kumar Verma
India
Thi Mong Diep NGUYEN
France
Dr. Muhammad Akram
Pakistan
Dr. Imran Azad
Oman
Dr. Meenakshi Malik
India
Aseel Hadi Hamzah
Iraq
Anam Bhatti
Malaysia
Md. Amir Hossain
Bangladesh
Ahmet İPEKÇİ
Turkey
Mirzadi Gohari
Iran