Background: Silica from plastic red top sample collection tubes and barium cause recognized artifacts in slide preparations for microscopic examination.
Objectives: The objectives of this study were to evaluate and directly compare the microscopic appearance of silica and barium particles and various slide preparation techniques (e.g., use of coverslips, oil immersion, and different stains). A secondary objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of silica particles on cellular morphology after mechanical trauma with cytocentrifugation.
Methods: Fluid samples (deionized water, pleural effusion, peritoneal effusion, cerebrospinal fluid, and urine) were collected and evaluated in silica- and non-silica-containing tubes. Barium was added to silica and non-silica samples. Direct and cytocentrifuge preparations were compared to evaluate the effect of silica particles on cellular morphology. Preparations were stained with Wright-Giemsa, rhodizonic acid disodium salt, Alizarin Red, Grocott's methenamine silver, and Prussian blue.
Results: Silica and barium particles were identifiable via light microscopy with and without polarized light, although silica particles diminished with immersion oil. Barium particles retained their structure and diminished less under oil. Cytoseal mounting medium for coverslip placement resulted in diminished refractility of silica and some barium particles. Silica particles with mechanical interaction during cytocentrifugation resulted in disrupted cellular morphology with many lysed cells. Silica and barium particles were negative for all special stains tested.
Conclusions: Silica from plastic red top tubes adversely affects cell morphology in cytocentrifuge preparations, potentially affecting manual differential cell counts and compromising diagnostic interpretation. Samples intended for microscopic evaluation should not be collected in silica-containing tubes.
Keywords: artifact; red top tube; silicone.
© 2023 American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology.