The Contributory Role of Cell Blocks in Salivary Gland Neoplasms Fine Needle Aspirations Classified by the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytology

The Milan system atypia of undetermined significance: 5-year performance data

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the category atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) at the authors' institution based on the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology.

METHODS

All AUS cases diagnosed at Fimlab Laboratories between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022, were included. Histologic verifications were checked until May 31, 2023. The upper-bound and lower-bound risk of malignancy and risk of neoplasm were calculated. The timelines between the pathology laboratory workflow and patient management were also calculated.

RESULTS

From 1157 fine-needle aspirations (FNAs), 162 (14.0%) AUS cases were diagnosed in 146 patients, with an average ± standard deviation age of 66.1 ± 14.9 years. There was variation in the AUS percentages, with higher values during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic years (15% and 17.5% in 2020 and 2021, respectively). Seventy-five cases (46.3%) had histologic follow-up: 16 were malignant neoplasms, and 36 were benign neoplasms. The upper and the lower bounds of the-risk of malignancy and risk of neoplasm were 21.3% and 69.3% and 9.9% and 32.1%, respectively. The average time from the first FNA with an AUS diagnosis to surgical resection ranged from 6 to 682 days, and the time to the first repeat FNA ranged from 10 to 691 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicated higher percentages of AUS cases compared with the reference value, which may be attributed to the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The risk of malignancy calculated in this study was closer to the reference value from the first edition of the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology compared with the second edition.

How the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology works in cytopathology practice: Meta-analysis of prospective studies and comparison with retrospective studies

BACKGROUND

The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) is widely accepted and endorsed by professional societies. Although several studies focusing on the MSRSGC have been published, few have been prospective studies. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the MSRSGC in cytopathology practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify all prospective studies on the MSRSGC. The risk of malignancy (ROM), risk of neoplasm, and diagnostic accuracy for each diagnostic category were calculated. Data were tabulated in Microsoft Excel, and analyses were performed with the Open Meta-Analyst program.

RESULTS

Seven prospective and seven retrospective studies were identified. The total number of fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) was 1587 in the prospective studies and 1764 in the retrospective studies. The ROM values for the nondiagnostic, nonneoplastic, atypia of undetermined significance, benign neoplasm, salivary gland neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential, suspicious for malignancy, and malignant categories in prospective versus retrospective studies were 21.0% versus 26.6%, 9.4% versus 8.1%, 34.9% versus 39.6%, 2.4% versus 2.1%, 36.6% versus 31.2%, 86.0% versus 66.0%, and 97.0% versus 96.7%, respectively. Sensitivities, specificities, and diagnostic odds ratios were 83.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.1%-90.8%) versus 89.1% (95% CI, 83.6%-92.9%), 98.4% (95% CI, 96.6%-99.3%) versus 94.9% (95% CI, 91.9%-96.9%), and 310.7 (95% CI, 121.2-796.6) versus 218.8 (95% CI, 107.3-438.1).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis indicated that the MSRSGC works well in FNA cytopathology practice and improves diagnostic accuracy in all diagnostic categories. The ROMs of prospective studies were in concordance with the MSRSGC reference values.

Doing more with less: integrating small biopsies in cytology practice

Cytopathologists are at the forefront of specimen acquisition during many different procedures while providing rapid on site evaluation (ROSE). This has added pressure to cytopathologists as more and more ancillary testing is being requested on smaller amounts of tissue. By focusing on the most common organ sites: lung, head and neck, and pancreas, there is a discussion of what the cytopathologist needs to know to triage tissue successfully. Finally, there is a discussion of the logistical aspects of integrating small biopsies into everyday practice.

Cell block practices in European cytopathology laboratories

BACKGROUND

There are numerous methods and procedures described for the preparation of cell blocks (CBs) from cytological samples. The objective of this study was to determine current practices and issues with CBs in European laboratories.

METHODS

A link to an online survey, with 11 questions about CB practices, was distributed to cytology laboratories via participants of United Kingdom National External Quality Assurance Service for Cellular Pathology Techniques and national representatives in the European Federation of Cytology Societies.

RESULTS

A total of 402 laboratories responded completely (337/402, 84%) or partially (65/402, 16%) to the survey by February 4, 2022. The most common CB practice is embedding cell pellets using plasma and thrombin (23.3%), agar (17.1%), Shandon/Epredia Cytoblock (11.4%), HistoGel (7.9%), and Cellient (3.5%). Other methods such as CytoFoam, albumin, gelatin, Cytomatrix, and collodion bags are rarely used (1.0%, 0.7%, 0.7%, 0.3%, and 0.2%, respectively). CBs are also prepared from naturally occurring clots or tissue fragments (29.5%) and cells scraped from unstained or prestained smears (4.4%). The most frequent issues with the CBs in a daily cytology practice are low cellularity (248/402, 62%) and dispersed cells (89/402, 22%), regardless of the CBs preparation method or how the samples for embedding were selected.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a great variability in CB practices in European laboratories with low cellular CBs as the main issue. Additional studies are mandatory to evaluate and improve performance and cellular yield of CBs.

Application of the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (MSRSGC) is a standard, evidence-based classification system for salivary gland fine-needle aspiration (SG-FNA). Since it was published in 2018, many researchers across the world have applied this uniform reporting system to their cohorts.

METHODS

The authors comprehensively reviewed cohort studies conducted since publication of the MSRSGC and performed a meta-analysis. The risk of neoplasm and the risk of malignancy (ROM) were calculated for each diagnostic category, and their diagnostic efficacy was evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of SG-FNAs was 10,706, and 7168 of those had histopathologic follow-up. The ROM for each category was: nondiagnostic, 11.4%; nonneoplastic, 10.9%; atypia of undetermined significance, 30.5%; neoplasm-benign, 2.8%; neoplasm-salivary gland neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential, 37.7%; suspicious for malignancy, 83.8%; and malignant, 97.7%. Low-level heterogeneity was observed in ROM estimation. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio for differentiating malignant and benign lesions were 88.0%, 98.5% and 520.3, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting of SG-FNA using the MSRSGC demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy. The ROM for each category was generally concordant with the recommendations, except for the suspicious for malignancy category, which was significantly higher than the reference value. The tiered, standardized classification system would benefit the clinical management of salivary gland lesions.