Journal of cytology · 2022
Reclassification of Salivary Gland Aspirates Based on "The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytology": A Five-Year Retrospective Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Pahwa Saloni, Panjwani Poonam, Gnanapriya V
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The Milan System for reporting salivary gland cytopathology helps standardize reporting systems across institutions, improve communication between clinicians and pathologists and guide the clinical management of patients.
AIMS: This study was undertaken to evaluate the utility of the Milan system classification in cytology reporting.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The present study is a retrospective study conducted over a period of five years in tertiary care centre.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: All the cases of salivary gland aspirates were reviewed and reclassified into six diagnostic categories according to the Milan system of reporting salivary gland cytology (MSRSGC). Cytological diagnosis was correlated with the histopathological diagnosis wherever available.
RESULTS: A total of 258 cases were classified using the Milan system as non-diagnostic (20.9%), non-neoplastic (26.3%), atypia of undetermined significance (4.7%), neoplasm benign (37.5%), neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential (3.5%), suspicious for malignancy (0.4%), and malignancy (6.6%). Cytohistological discordance was noted among 8/76 cases (10.5%). The sensitivity and specificity of FNAC were 75% and 98.5%, respectively. The risk of malignancy was 14.2% for Category I, 9% for II, 50% for III, zero for IVA and IVB, and 83.3% for category VI.
CONCLUSIONS: The new classification system helps pathologists to standardize reporting leading to better clinical and surgical management.
AIMS: This study was undertaken to evaluate the utility of the Milan system classification in cytology reporting.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The present study is a retrospective study conducted over a period of five years in tertiary care centre.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: All the cases of salivary gland aspirates were reviewed and reclassified into six diagnostic categories according to the Milan system of reporting salivary gland cytology (MSRSGC). Cytological diagnosis was correlated with the histopathological diagnosis wherever available.
RESULTS: A total of 258 cases were classified using the Milan system as non-diagnostic (20.9%), non-neoplastic (26.3%), atypia of undetermined significance (4.7%), neoplasm benign (37.5%), neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential (3.5%), suspicious for malignancy (0.4%), and malignancy (6.6%). Cytohistological discordance was noted among 8/76 cases (10.5%). The sensitivity and specificity of FNAC were 75% and 98.5%, respectively. The risk of malignancy was 14.2% for Category I, 9% for II, 50% for III, zero for IVA and IVB, and 83.3% for category VI.
CONCLUSIONS: The new classification system helps pathologists to standardize reporting leading to better clinical and surgical management.