Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Abstracts
Book Review
Case Report
Case Series
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:1 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:3 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:4 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas -Sampling Techniques for Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:2 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas- EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:5 of 5
Commentary
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series (CMAS), Editorial
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series: Editorial
Cytojournal Quiz Case
Editorial
Erratum
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Methodology
Methodology Article
Methodology Articles
Original Article
Pap Smear Collection and Preparation: Key Points
Quiz Case
Research
Research Article
Review
Review Article
Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
View Point
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Letter to the Editor
2018
:15;
6
doi:
10.4103/cytojournal.cytojournal_36_17

Myoepithelioma of soft tissue and diagnostic pitfall in cytology

Address: Sanitation 1 Medical Academic Center, Bangkok, Thailand
Department of Community Medicine, Dr. DY Patil University, Pune, Maharashtra, India

*Corresponding author

Licence

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Dear Editor,

The report on “Myoepithelioma of soft tissue and diagnostic pitfall in cytology” is very interesting.[1] Bhanvadia et al. concluded that “a cytopathologist should be aware of bland nature of round, epithelioid and plasmacytoid cells in myxoid and fibrillary background to hit the correct diagnosis.”[1] In fact, the misinterpretation problem as discussed in the present report is a common problem in diagnostic cytology and it is considered as a postanalytical error. Nevertheless, in laboratory medicine, there are also possible errors in other phases of laboratory testing. Bhanvadia et al. might not recognize the importance of quality control and possible error, which might occur in nay phase of the test ranging from preanalytical thorough analytical until postanalytical phase. In laboratory medicine, the most common problem error does not occur in postanalytical phase but preanalytical phase. The problem usually occurs due to patient preparation and specimen correction. This kind of problem can be seen worldwide regardless the quality certification of the medical laboratory or not.[2]

COMPETING INTERESTS STATEMENT BY ALL AUTHORS

The authors state that there are no conflicts of interest.

AUTHORSHIP STATEMENT BY ALL AUTHORS

Joob 50 %, Wiwanitkit 50 %.

ETHICS STATEMENT BY ALL AUTHORS

Approved.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (In alphabetic Order)

Nil.

REFERENCES

  1. , , , , . Myoepithelioma of soft tissue in the gluteal region: Diagnostic pitfall in cytology. Cytojournal. 2017;14:14.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , . Types and frequency of preanalytical mistakes in the first Thai ISO 9002:1994 certified clinical laboratory, a 6 – month monitoring. BMC Clin Pathol. 2001;1:5.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections