Prediction of Malignancy in Salivary Gland Tumors by a New Cytology Reporting System

Prioritizing parotid gland surgery: A call for the implementation of the MSRSGC classification

BACKGROUND

The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) is developed to aid diagnosis and management of salivary gland tumors. This study evaluates the time-to-treatment initiation (TTI) for parotid gland tumors in the Netherlands and relates these to the MSRSGC classification. Subsequently, the use of the MSRSGC in the Netherlands is evaluated.

METHODS

Data regarding fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and histopathological resections of the parotid were gathered from the Dutch nationwide pathology data bank (PALGA). The TTI was calculated for each MSRSGC category and type of treating center. FNACs performed from 2018 to 2021 were gathered from PALGA to estimate how frequently the MSRSGC classification was applied.

RESULTS

Median TTI in days were 86 for nondiagnostic (MSRSGC I), 75 for nonneoplastic (MSRSGC II), 65 for atypia of unknown significance (AUS) (MSRSGC III), 89 for benign (MSRSGC IVa), 52 for salivary gland neoplasm of unknown malignant potential (SUMP) (MSRSGC IVb), 31 for suspected malignant (MSRSGC V), and 30 for malignant (MSRSGC VI) categories. Significant variation in the TTI between the types of treating centers was found for the nondiagnostic, nonneoplastic, AUS, SUMP, and suspected malignant categories. In the first 3 years after the introduction of the MSRSGC, the pathologist stated the MSRSGC classification in 6.4% of all reports.

CONCLUSIONS

The median TTI for most categories is long, and there is significant interhospital variation in TTI. Preoperative risk stratification and treatment prioritization in parotid gland surgery in the Netherlands should be improved. The MSRSGC could contribute to this. Until 2021, the MSRSGS classification was implemented on a limited scale in the Netherlands.

Comparisons among the Ultrasonography Prediction Model, Real-Time and Shear Wave Elastography in the Evaluation of Major Salivary Gland Tumors

We aimed to validate the diagnostic accuracy of a novel sonographic scoring model and compare it with other methods in the evaluation of malignant major salivary gland tumors. We enrolled 138 patients who received neck ultrasound (US) with fine needle aspiration (FNA) and further operations or core needle biopsies for major salivary gland tumors from June 2015 to October 2021. The sonographic scoring model was presented as 2.08 × (vague boundary) + 1.75 × (regional lymphadenopathy) + 1.18 × (irregular or speculated shape) + 1.45 × (absence of posterior acoustic enhancement) + 2.4 × (calcification). We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the sonographic scoring model with shear wave elastography (SWE), real-time elastography (RTE), and US-FNA cytology for differentiating between benign and malignant lesions. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 58%, 89%, and 85% for the sonographic scoring model, 74%, 62%, and 64% for the SD of SWE with optimal cutoff value of 31.5 kPa, 69%, 70%, and 70% for the 4-point scoring system of RTE, and 74%, 93%, and 91% for US-FNA cytology, respectively. The sonographic scoring model is feasible as assistance in the evaluation of major salivary gland tumors. US-FNA cytology remains the tool of choice in diagnosing malignant salivary gland tumors.

Milan system for reporting salivary gland cytopathology: Adoption and outcomes in a community setting

BACKGROUND

Milan system for reporting salivary gland cytopathology (MSRSGC) was introduced to standardize reporting of salivary gland cytopathology.

METHODS

A retrospective review of ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of salivary gland lesions was performed between January 2018 and May 2021 at a community otolaryngology practice. Diagnostic accuracy and rate of diagnostic sialoadenectomy were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 203 FNAs (fine needle aspiration) were performed in 184 patients. MSRSGC was utilized in 87/203 cytopathology reports, with a diagnostic accuracy of 84%. Descriptive reporting was used in 115 FNAs, with a diagnostic accuracy of 89% (p = 0.68). Sialoadenectomy rate was 41% for MSRSGC compared to 36% in descriptive cytopathology (p = 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

MSRSGC is as accurate as descriptive cytopathology and the rate of diagnostic sialoadenectomy between both groups is similar in our community. The MSRSGC brings uniformity and standardization to the FNA reporting process.