Cytology of the healthy canine and feline ocular surface: comparison between cytobrush and impression technique.

Abstract

Impression cytology (IC) is a noninvasive technique in which filters are used to sample superficial layers of ocular epithelium. The aim of this study was to compare cytology specimens obtained by IC and cytobrush from healthy canine and feline eyes. Dogs and cats were prospectively sampled using polytetrafluorethylene filters on the right eye, and cytobrush on the left eye. Wright-Giemsa-stained specimens were evaluated by 2 observers. Cellularity, preservation, and morphology of cells and presence of goblet and inflammatory cells were scored with a 4-grade scale. Inter-observer agreement and effects of topical anesthesia were analyzed. In 20 canine IC samples, 10 showed good cellularity (score 2-3) and 13 good preservation. Superficial epithelial cells (SEC) were present in 13/20 of IC, while basal-intermediate cells (BIC) were seen in 14/20. In 6/20 and 7/20, goblet and inflammatory cells were noted, respectively. In 20 cats, 15 of IC showed good cellularity and 14 good preservation, and SEC were present in 16/20 of IC and BIC in 17/20. In 13/20 and 3/20 cats, goblet cells and inflammatory cells were noted, respectively. Canine cytobrush specimens appeared well preserved (9/20) and had good cellularity (8/20). In feline cytobrush specimens, good preservation and cellularity were observed in 16/20 and 14/20, respectively. In both species, all cell types were present without a clear separation. There was moderate to fair agreement about cellular morphology in IC between observers. Specimens obtained with and without anesthesia were comparable. Impression cytology allowed collection of samples with maintained cytoarchitecture, while cytoplasmatic and nuclear details were often difficult to evaluate.