BACKGROUND: Practice patterns regarding on-site assessment of the adequacy of image-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNABs) vary among laboratories, but in many laboratories primary responsibility rests with the cytotechnologists. On-site evaluation provides feedback on the need for additional passes and facilitates triaging of the specimen for time-sensitive ancillary studies. Prior studies have suggested that cytotechnologists can assess the initially obtained specimens correctly, but they are few in number and limited by small size. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency with which our cytotechnologists were able to correctly assess specimens as adequate using a large-scale database that included a wide range of image-guided FNABs. METHODS: The frequency that on-site adequacy assessments of 5241 image-guided FNABs were correct was determined by correlating the cytotechnologists' assessments of adequacy with the final cytologic interpretation. An adequacy assessment was considered correct if the FNAB was ultimately reported as satisfactory and unequivocally benign or malignant. An adequate reading on a case that was ultimately reported as unsatisfactory, atypical, or suspicious was deemed "incorrect." The effect of imaging modality was also analyzed. RESULTS: Of 5241 FNABs, 2784 (53%) were interpreted as adequate on site. Of these, 2637 (95%) were correctly considered adequate. Of the common biopsy sites sampled, the adequacy assessments for liver FNABs demonstrated the highest frequency for being correctly considered adequate (97%) and those for kidney FNABs showed the lowest (90%). Imaging modality had no effect on accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Cytotechnologists are almost always correct when assessing initial FNAB samples as adequate.
BACKGROUND: Practice patterns regarding on-site assessment of the adequacy of image-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNABs) vary among laboratories, but in many laboratories primary responsibility rests with the cytotechnologists. On-site evaluation provides feedback on the need for additional passes and facilitates triaging of the specimen for time-sensitive ancillary studies. Prior studies have suggested that cytotechnologists can assess the initially obtained specimens correctly, but they are few in number and limited by small size. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency with which our cytotechnologists were able to correctly assess specimens as adequate using a large-scale database that included a wide range of image-guided FNABs. METHODS: The frequency that on-site adequacy assessments of 5241 image-guided FNABs were correct was determined by correlating the cytotechnologists' assessments of adequacy with the final cytologic interpretation. An adequacy assessment was considered correct if the FNAB was ultimately reported as satisfactory and unequivocally benign or malignant. An adequate reading on a case that was ultimately reported as unsatisfactory, atypical, or suspicious was deemed "incorrect." The effect of imaging modality was also analyzed. RESULTS: Of 5241 FNABs, 2784 (53%) were interpreted as adequate on site. Of these, 2637 (95%) were correctly considered adequate. Of the common biopsy sites sampled, the adequacy assessments for liver FNABs demonstrated the highest frequency for being correctly considered adequate (97%) and those for kidney FNABs showed the lowest (90%). Imaging modality had no effect on accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Cytotechnologists are almost always correct when assessing initial FNAB samples as adequate.
Authors: C Lim; H S Sekhon; J C Cutz; D M Hwang; S Kamel-Reid; R F Carter; G da Cunha Santos; T Waddell; M Binnie; M Patel; N Paul; T Chung; A Brade; R El-Maraghi; C Sit; M S Tsao; N B Leighl Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2017-04-27 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: William D Travis; Elisabeth Brambilla; Masayuki Noguchi; Andrew G Nicholson; Kim Geisinger; Yasushi Yatabe; Yuichi Ishikawa; Ignacio Wistuba; Douglas B Flieder; Wilbur Franklin; Adi Gazdar; Philip S Hasleton; Douglas W Henderson; Keith M Kerr; Iver Petersen; Victor Roggli; Erik Thunnissen; Ming Tsao Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 5.534