Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Diagn Cytopathol. 2018 Oct;46(10):859-863. doi: 10.1002/dc.24037.

A comparison study of the reporting systems for salivary gland fine needle aspirations: Are they really different?

Author information

1
Department of Pathology, Portuguese Oncology Institute of Porto (IPO Porto), Porto, Portugal.
2
Unit of Molecular Pathology, IPATIMUP, Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
3
Cancer signaling metabolism-Epithelial Interactions in Cancer, I3S, Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
4
Department of Pathology subdivision of Cytopathology, Acibadem University, Turkey.
5
Medical Faculty of 4th year, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, TR, Turkey.
6
Department of Pathology, Medical Faculty of Porto University, Porto, Portugal.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Recently a new system for reporting salivary gland fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology was proposed, the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC). Herein, we evaluated diagnostic accuracy of salivary gland FNA, comparing the system previously used in our hospital with the Milan system.

METHODS:

Salivary gland specimens obtained between 2011 and 2017 were reclassified according to MSRSGC. Risk of malignancy for each diagnostic category was determined. Diagnostic yield of both classifications was evaluated.

RESULTS:

The cases (n = 388) were classified according to the old system: nondiagnostic (n = 28), benign (n = 246), atypical (n = 36), neoplastic (n = 57), suspicious for malignancy (n = 7) and malignant (n = 14). The lesions were distributed according to the MSRSGC: nondiagnostic (n = 28), non-neoplastic (n = 89), atypia of undetermined significance (n = 39), benign neoplasm (n = 156), neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential (n = 55), suspicious for malignancy (n = 7) and malignant (n = 14). When considering only benign and malignant cases, both classifications showed the same sensitivity (62.5%), specificity (100%) and similar accuracy (95.8%). Comparison between the two systems showed no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS:

Salivary gland FNA has high diagnostic accuracy and assists clinical management independently of the reporting system used, however, in some cases, the use of Milan system could be beneficial, since it allows an enhanced category stratification.

KEYWORDS:

Milan system; cytology; fine needle aspiration; reporting system; salivary gland

PMID:
30369104
DOI:
10.1002/dc.24037
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center