HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dehard, S. Articles by Clercx, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dehard, S. Articles by Clercx, C.

Comparison of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Cytospins and Smears in Dogs and Cats

From the Departments of Clinical Sciences (Dehard, Bernaerts, Peeters, McEntee, Clercx) and Quantitative Genetics (Detilleux), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Liège, 4000 Belgium; and the Department of Pathology and Microbiology (Day), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Bristol, Langford House, Langford, North Somerset, United Kingdom BS40 5DU.

Differences in the cytological interpretation of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) after cytospin preparation (CP) or manual smearing of pelleted cells preparation (MSP) were investigated in client-owned dogs and cats with inflammatory or infectious lower respiratory disease. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from healthy cats was also examined. With MSP, cell lysis was more frequently observed, and cellular distribution was more heterogeneous throughout the slide. When samples from healthy and diseased animals were considered together, a significantly greater percentage of neutrophils was seen on CP than on MSP slides (P<0.002). Cytospin preparations were considered of better quality in all individual comparisons. Cytospin preparation is advised in the evaluation of BALF with low total cell count. When only MSPs are evaluated, clinicians should be aware that differential neutrophil counts may underestimate the counts found on CP slides.