Literature DB >> 15672359

Relative accuracy of fine-needle aspiration and frozen section in the diagnosis of lesions of the parotid gland.

Raja R Seethala1, Virginia A LiVolsi, Zubair W Baloch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Both fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and frozen section (FS), although useful in preoperative and intraoperative management, have their advantages and pitfalls when used in the diagnosis of salivary gland lesions. The accuracy of each of these modalities has been assessed separately in many studies; a direct comparison of these techniques on a large cohort has not been well studied. Herein, we determine the relative accuracies of both FNA and FS in the diagnosis of salivary gland lesions.
METHODS: We reviewed a cohort of 220 cases of parotid gland FNA with histologic follow-up; FS was performed in 57 cases (26%). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FNA and FS were determined with respect to the final histologic diagnosis. For these calculations, benign diagnosis was considered negative, whereas a malignant diagnosis was considered positive. In addition, we re-reviewed the FNA and FS slides in cases that had conflicting FNA and FS results.
RESULTS: Of the 220 cases examined, the FNA diagnoses were as follows: benign (n = 142), malignant (n = 52), indeterminate (n = 14), and nondiagnostic (n = 12). Correlating these findings with the histologic findings, nine cases (4%) were false negative, whereas 12 (5%) were false positive. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for FNA when diagnostic were 86%, 92%, and 90%, respectively. In 57 cases with FS, seven (12%) were false negative, whereas none were false positive. The FS was able to change to benign four diagnoses that were malignant by FNA and provide a diagnosis for five nondiagnostic FNAs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for FS were 77%, 100%, and 88%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for FNA and FS combined were 90%, 100%, and 95%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Both FNA and FS provide a similar accuracy. FS may be useful if FNA is nondiagnostic and may also be useful in confirming or refuting malignancy in some cases. Hence, both techniques are complementary to each other in the diagnosis of salivary gland lesions. 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15672359     DOI: 10.1002/hed.20142

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Head Neck        ISSN: 1043-3074            Impact factor:   3.147


  31 in total

1.  [On the diagnosis and treatment of parotid gland tumors. Results of a nationwide survey of ENT hospitals in Germany].

Authors:  S F Preuss; O Guntinas-Lichius
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Salivary gland tumor fine-needle aspiration cytology: a proposal for a risk stratification classification.

Authors:  Christopher C Griffith; Reetesh K Pai; Frank Schneider; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Robert L Ferris; Jonas T Johnson; Raja R Seethala
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 3.  Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of parotid gland lesions: an update of the literature.

Authors:  E David; V Cantisani; M De Vincentiis; P S Sidhu; A Greco; M Tombolini; F M Drudi; D Messineo; S Gigli; A Rubini; D Fresilli; D Ferrari; F Flammia; F D'Ambrosio
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2016-01-27

Review 4.  Sensitivity, Specificity, and Posttest Probability of Parotid Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  C Carrie Liu; Ashok R Jethwa; Samir S Khariwala; Jonas Johnson; Jennifer J Shin
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 3.497

5.  A clinical analysis of 37 cases with lymphoepithelial carcinoma of the major salivary gland treated by surgical resection and postoperative radiotherapy: a single institution study.

Authors:  Fei Li; Guopei Zhu; Yulong Wang; Yu Wang; Tongzhen Chen; Qinghai Ji
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 6.  Salivary gland carcinomas.

Authors:  Tobias Ettl; Stephan Schwarz-Furlan; Martin Gosau; Torsten E Reichert
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2012-07-29

7.  Cytopathologic features of mammary analogue secretory carcinoma.

Authors:  Justin A Bishop; Raluca Yonescu; Denise A S Batista; William H Westra; Syed Z Ali
Journal:  Cancer Cytopathol       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Cytologic grading of primary malignant salivary gland tumors: A blinded review by an international panel.

Authors:  Daniel N Johnson; Mine Onenerk; Jeffrey F Krane; Esther Diana Rossi; Zubair Baloch; Güliz Barkan; Massimo Bongiovanni; Fabiano Callegari; Sule Canberk; Glen Dixon; Andrew Field; Christopher C Griffith; Nirag Jhala; Sara Jiang; Daniel Kurtycz; Lester Layfield; Oscar Lin; Zahra Maleki; Miguel Perez-Machado; Marc Pusztaszeri; Philippe Vielh; He Wang; Matthew A Zarka; William C Faquin
Journal:  Cancer Cytopathol       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Discordance between fine-needle aspiration cytology and histopathology in patients with mucoepidermoid carcinoma of parotid gland.

Authors:  H Iftikhar; M Sohail Awan; M Usman; A Khoja; W Khan
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 10.  Usefulness of fine-needle aspiration in parotid diagnostics.

Authors:  Attilio Carlo Salgarelli; Paolo Capparè; Pierantonio Bellini; Marco Collini
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2009-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.