Jason M Rarick1, Jay Wasman, Claire W Michael. 1. Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Case Medical Center/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the morphological features of salivary gland fine-needle aspirates (FNA) on ThinPrep® (TP) preparations. Emphasis is placed on the commonalities and specific differences between TP and conventional smear (CS) preparations. STUDY DESIGN: The cytology and surgical pathology archives were searched for 'salivary' or 'parotid' at our institution from 2003 to 2013 for cases processed by TP and with a range of specified diagnoses and surgical follow-up. These cases were reviewed by the authors. A review of the known literature was also performed. RESULTS: Morphological features and artifacts were noted for the most common salivary gland lesions. General features noted in the literature were identified, along with novel features identified on our review of cases. Emphasis was placed on cellular alterations, extracellular differences and architectural changes. CONCLUSIONS: The multitude of both benign and malignant lesions coupled with the unique artifacts encountered on TP makes salivary gland FNAs difficult for most practicing pathologists and cytopathologists. For this reason, many laboratories have been reluctant to implement TP preparations for these lesions. With knowledge of the specific artifacts and differences on TP compared to CS, TP can be used with confidence without a compromise in diagnostic accuracy for adequately cellular samples.
OBJECTIVE: To review the morphological features of salivary gland fine-needle aspirates (FNA) on ThinPrep® (TP) preparations. Emphasis is placed on the commonalities and specific differences between TP and conventional smear (CS) preparations. STUDY DESIGN: The cytology and surgical pathology archives were searched for 'salivary' or 'parotid' at our institution from 2003 to 2013 for cases processed by TP and with a range of specified diagnoses and surgical follow-up. These cases were reviewed by the authors. A review of the known literature was also performed. RESULTS: Morphological features and artifacts were noted for the most common salivary gland lesions. General features noted in the literature were identified, along with novel features identified on our review of cases. Emphasis was placed on cellular alterations, extracellular differences and architectural changes. CONCLUSIONS: The multitude of both benign and malignant lesions coupled with the unique artifacts encountered on TP makes salivary gland FNAs difficult for most practicing pathologists and cytopathologists. For this reason, many laboratories have been reluctant to implement TP preparations for these lesions. With knowledge of the specific artifacts and differences on TP compared to CS, TP can be used with confidence without a compromise in diagnostic accuracy for adequately cellular samples.