Cytology of the central zone of the prostate

Primary prostatic central zone adenocarcinoma

The central zone (CZ) of the prostate is embryologically, anatomically, and histologically distinct. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) and prostatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) are encountered in the CZ, but have not been well studied. Non-CZ PAC that spread into the CZ can mimic CZ PAC. We reviewed 300 consecutive radical prostatectomies performed for PAC to identify cases showing PAC and HGPIN in the CZ. There were nine PAC (3%) localized predominantly in the CZ, presenting as a single tumor nodule (8/9) and associated with 4.5+/-1.1 foci HGPIN in the CZ and with only 1.7+/-0.5 foci in the PZ. Of the 291 non-CZ PAC, 24 cases showed satellite tumor nodules in the CZ, and 92 cases demonstrated secondary contiguous spread to the CZ. As compared to the non-CZ PAC, CZ PAC tended to have lower tumor volume, but had higher Gleason scores (8.10+/-0.6 vs. 6.30+/-0.7, p<0.05), as well as a higher incidence of a ductal carcinoma component (6/9), higher rates of capsular penetration, positive resection margins (4/9), and seminal vesicle spread (2/9). The CZ HGPIN associated with CZ PAC demonstrated cells with prominent nucleoli and formed either slender papillary structures or cribriform/solid patterns. The correlating positive biopsy cores were from the mid portion or from base of prostate and contained foci of HGPIN in 4/7 cases. The CZ PAC is characteristically accompanied by more foci of HGPIN in the CZ than in non-CZ and is associated with high grade and high stage. Preoperative diagnosis of CZ PAC can be suspected due to the histopathological features in the biopsy and is important to improve the free surgical resection rate.

Cytological features of prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia

Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is an acknowledged method for diagnosing prostate cancer. False-positive results are uncommon, but concerns have been raised that prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) could be misinterpreted as carcinoma. Therefore, we attempted to describe cytological features of PIN. Cells were scraped from macroscopically normal areas of 177 radical prostatectomy specimens, smeared and Giemsa-stained. Histological slides from these areas were reviewed, and 17 samples with high-grade PIN and with no invasive cancer were selected. Smears from 17 invasive cancers were used for comparison. Cancer showed high cellularity and dissociation, while PIN smears only contained a few clusters of atypical cells. Pronounced nuclear atypia, prominent or multiple nucleoli and mucin were more common in cancer, while cytoplasmic granules, crystalloids and cluster size did not distinguish between PIN and cancer. In conclusion, PIN should not be diagnosed by FNAC alone. However, a highly cellular smear with pronounced atypia seems to preclude PIN.

The continuing role of fine-needle aspiration of the prostate gland into the 21st century: A tribute to Torsten Löwhagen

A brief review of the history of transrectal fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of the prostate gland is reported in this article; the authors'experience of FNA during the last 20 yr is described also. Despite the worldwide acceptance of the thin-needle core approach, the use of transrectal FNA of palpable abnormalities of the prostate still is advocated because it is cheaper, faster, easier to perform, and results in lower morbidity than any other technique so far developed. High sensitivity, specificity, and efficacy account for its reliability. Appropriate training in performing transrectal FNA of the prostate and in interpreting the smears is, of course, essential. Transrectal FNA should be the initial diagnostic procedure for suspected prostatic cancer and will continue to be a useful diagnostic tool in the 21st century.