Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.

Buy FullText & PDF Unlimited re-access via MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *

Select

KAB

Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!

If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.

Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.

Learn more

Access via DeepDyve Unlimited fulltext viewing Of this article Organize, annotate And mark up articles Printing And downloading restrictions apply

Select

Subscribe Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use read more

Subcription rates

Select

* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: July 05, 2022
Accepted: September 26, 2022
Published online: November 29, 2022

Number of Print Pages: 9
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 6

ISSN: 0001-5547 (Print)
eISSN: 1938-2650 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ACY

Abstract

Introduction: In 2020, the World Health Organization-International Agency for Research on Cancer/International Academy of Cytology (WHO-IARC IAC) joint project was commenced to develop standardized nomenclature and diagnostic criteria in cytopathology internationally. Our institution has been coding all respiratory cytological specimens in a similar fashion for over 10 years. Our aim was to analyse the effectiveness of our respiratory cytology coding system by calculating the estimated risk of malignancy (ROM) and rates of each diagnostic category. Methods: Over a 2 year period, all endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), bronchial brushing, bronchial washing, bronchial lavage, and sputum specimens reported at our institution were analysed. For each specimen, the diagnostic code, the relevant indication for each diagnostic procedure, the diagnosis, and the presence or absence of a positive corresponding biopsy were recorded. Results: In total, 1,432 respiratory cytological specimens from 945 patients over a 2-year period were analysed. 467 specimens were confirmed to be associated with a malignant process. The overall ROM for respiratory cytology specimens was 37.7% for nondiagnostic, 18.1% for benign, 46.7% for atypical, 85.7% for suspicious for malignancy, and 91.9% for malignant. For each diagnostic procedure, the ROM increased from the benign to malignant categories. Discussion/Conclusion: Our ROM rates for overall respiratory cytology specimens and for EBUS-TBNA, bronchial brushing, and bronchial washing specimens separately are concordant with other major international studies. With the WHO-IARC IAC joint project in progress and an international respiratory cytology coding system being developed, our study has the potential to add value by providing indicative ROM rates, which can be used to inform the development of this new classification system. Our rates of diagnostic accuracy are in keeping with international standards, which support the accuracy of our data.

© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel

References Layfield LJ, Esebua M. A modified Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology system for reporting respiratory cytology specimens: implications for estimates of malignancy risk and diagnostic accuracy. Diagn Cytopathol. 2021;4911:1167–72. Yoshizawa A, Hiroshima K, Takenaka A, Haba R, Kawahara K, Minami Y, et al. Cytology reporting system for lung cancer from the Japan Lung Cancer Society and the Japanese Society of Clinical Cytology: an extensive study containing more benign lesions. Acta Cytologica. 2022;66(2):124–33. Canberk S, Montezuma D, Aydin O, Demirhas MP, Denizci B, Akbas M, et al. The new guidelines of Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology for respiratory specimens: assessment of risk of malignancy and diagnostic yield in different cytological modalities. Diagn Cytopathol. 2018;46(9):725–9. Zhou F, Shum E, Moreira AL. Molecular cytology of the respiratory tract and pleura. Cytopathology. 2022;33(1):14–22. Heerink WJ, de Bock GH, de Jonge GJ, Groen HJM, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(1):138–48. Cibas ES, Ali SZ. The Bethesda system for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Thyroid. 2009;19(11):1159–65. Rosenthal DL, Wojcik EM, Kurtycz DFI. The Paris system for reporting urinary cytology. Springer; 2016. Mezei T. Current classification systems and standardized terminology in cytopathology. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2021;61(3):655–63. Layfield LJ, Esebua M, Schmidt RL, Witt BL. Malignancy risk associated with the EBUS-FNA diagnostic categories nondiagnostic, benign, atypical, suspicious for malignancy, and malignant for mediastinal lymph node aspirate specimens. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2015;4(5):276–81. Layfield LJ, Baloch Z, Elsheikh T, Litzky L, Rektman N, Travis WD, et al. Standardized terminology and nomenclature for respiratory cytology: the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines. Diagn Cytopathol. 2016;445:399–409. Fernández-Bussy S, Labarca G, Canals S, Caviedes I, Folch E, Majid A. Diagnostic yield of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for mediastinal staging in lung cancer. J bras pneumol. 2015;41(3):219–24. Jalaly JB, Ioannidis I, Layfield LJ, Baloch Z. Overview of diagnostic terminology and reporting. In: Layfield LJ, Baloch Z, editors. The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology System for reporting respiratory cytology: definitions, criteria, explanatory notes, and recommendations for ancillary testing. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 1–6. Layfield LJ, Esebua M, Dodd L, Giorgadze T, Schmidt RL. The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines for respiratory cytology: reproducibility of categories among observers. CytoJournal. 2018;15:22. Valderrabano P, Khazai L, Thompson ZJ, Leon ME, Otto KJ, Hallanger-Johnson JE, et al. Cancer risk stratification of indeterminate thyroid nodules: a cytological approach. Thyroid. 2017;27(10):1277–84. Policarpio-Nicolas MLC, Wick MR. False-positive interpretations in respiratory cytopathology: exemplary cases and literature review. Diagn Cytopathol. 2008;361:13–9. Divisi D, Zaccagna G, Barone M, Gabriele F, Crisci R. Endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS/TBNA): a diagnostic challenge for mediastinal lesions. Ann Transl Med. 2018 Mar;6(5):92. Chen C-C, Bai C-H, Lee K-Y, Chou Y-T, Pan S-T, Wang Y-H. Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of bronchial brushing cytology in lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Cancer Cytopathol. 2021;129(9):739–49. Layfield LJ, Dodd L, Factor R, Schmidt RL. Malignancy risk associated with diagnostic categories defined by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology pancreaticobiliary guidelines. Cancer Cytopathol. 2014;122(6):420–7. Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview

Received: July 05, 2022
Accepted: September 26, 2022
Published online: November 29, 2022

Number of Print Pages: 9
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 6

ISSN: 0001-5547 (Print)
eISSN: 1938-2650 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/ACY