Acta cytologica · 2015
Cytological Diagnoses of Adenocarcinoma in situ of the Cervix: Common Misdiagnoses.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Shuxia, Tian Dan, Li Ying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: In routine screening, glandular lesions have high false-negative and false-positive rates. Our study sought to improve the cytological diagnoses and differentiation of glandular lesions.
STUDY DESIGN: A total of 24 cytology slides were retrospectively reviewed. Among these slides, 15 were confirmed via histology to have varying amounts of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) components. The other 9 cytology slides exhibited AIS mimics that had been originally considered to be AIS or atypical glandular cells (AGCs) and were selected for differentiation from AIS.
RESULTS: Overall, 12 of the 15 cytological slides exhibited significant atypical glandular features that met the criteria for AIS. However, the original cytological diagnoses included 2 cases of AIS, 3 AGCs-favor neoplasia (AGC-FN), 2 AGCs, 1 case that was not otherwise specified (AGC-NOS), 1 NILM (negative for intraepithelial lesion and malignancy), 3 HSILs (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions), and 2 ASC-Hs (atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude HSIL). The latter 9 cytological slides were subsequently histologically confirmed to be 2 metaplasias, 2 reactive lesions, 1 decidual change, 3 serous adenocarcinomas, and 1 SCNEC (small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma).
CONCLUSION: Cytological screening will be valuable for identifying glandular lesions as effectively as squamous lesions if the doubly high false rates can be decreased.
STUDY DESIGN: A total of 24 cytology slides were retrospectively reviewed. Among these slides, 15 were confirmed via histology to have varying amounts of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) components. The other 9 cytology slides exhibited AIS mimics that had been originally considered to be AIS or atypical glandular cells (AGCs) and were selected for differentiation from AIS.
RESULTS: Overall, 12 of the 15 cytological slides exhibited significant atypical glandular features that met the criteria for AIS. However, the original cytological diagnoses included 2 cases of AIS, 3 AGCs-favor neoplasia (AGC-FN), 2 AGCs, 1 case that was not otherwise specified (AGC-NOS), 1 NILM (negative for intraepithelial lesion and malignancy), 3 HSILs (high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions), and 2 ASC-Hs (atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude HSIL). The latter 9 cytological slides were subsequently histologically confirmed to be 2 metaplasias, 2 reactive lesions, 1 decidual change, 3 serous adenocarcinomas, and 1 SCNEC (small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma).
CONCLUSION: Cytological screening will be valuable for identifying glandular lesions as effectively as squamous lesions if the doubly high false rates can be decreased.