ABSTRACT:
History: About a century back histology was the only means of microscopic diagnosis of malignancy, since than two methods, exfoliative and non-exfoliative which includes aspiration cytology and imprint cytodiagnosis have gradually evolved. Objective: Assessment of suitability of Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology, Imprint Cytodiagnosis and Histology in diagnosis of carcinomas. Variables: Imprint cyto diagnosis, Fine needle aspiration and histopathogenesis Materials and method: Seventy-four patients of carcinomas diagnosed by histopathogenesis taken as sample. Out of these 74 and 73 cases were diagnosed by imprint cytodiagnosis and F.N.A.C. respectively.. Findings and discussion: On comparision of results of all 74 cases obtained by Imprint cytodiagnosis,72 (97.29 %) were correctly diagnosed and 02(2.70%) false negative while nil percentage of false positive while in 73 cases diagnosed by F.N.A.C. 66(90.41%), 06(08.21%) and 01(01.36%) were correctly diagnosed, false negative and false positive respectively. Conclusion: Imprint cytodiagnosis was found slightly better than Fine needle aspiration cytology in diagnostic accuracy.