Wen-Hao Ren1, Shuang-Mei Zou1, Yue-Ming Zhang2, Lei Zhang2, Lin-Lin Zhao1, Ning Lu1, Jian Cao1,3. 1. Department of Pathology and Resident Training Base, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Endoscopy, National Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. 3. Department of Pathology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital and Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a minimally invasive technique for cytological and histological diagnosis. The objective of this study was to explore the role of cytological diagnosis in EBUS-TBNAs. METHODS: Eight hundred and thirteen consecutive cases performed EBUS-TBNA with both cytological and histological diagnoses were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were followed up for clinical data. RESULTS: Before immunohistochemical examination, the cytological sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNAs were 92.9% (421/453), 98.9% (348/352), 95.5% (769/805), respectively. After immunohistochemical examination, the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were 93.0% (423/455), 99.4% (348/350), 95.8% (771/805), respectively. The majority of false-negative were cases whose cytological diagnosis was "atypical" or the cytological diagnosis suggested "inadequate." "Neoplastic" were also prone to false-negative cytology. The diagnostic accordance rate of cytological subtyping was 90.3% for squamous-cell carcinoma, 99.2% for adenocarcinoma, and 98.1% for small-cell carcinoma before immunohistochemical examination, and became 85.9%, 98.5%, and 98.2% after immunohistochemical examination, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cytological diagnosis in EBUS-TBNAs had a good sensitivity and high specificity. The sensitivity and specificity of cytological diagnosis were proved to be higher after the immunohistochemical examination. At the same time, cytology had high accordance rate in subtype diagnosis. False-negative results occurred more commonly in cases whose cytological diagnosis was "atypical" or the cytological diagnosis suggested "inadequate" or the corresponding histological diagnosis was "Neoplastic."
BACKGROUND: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is a minimally invasive technique for cytological and histological diagnosis. The objective of this study was to explore the role of cytological diagnosis in EBUS-TBNAs. METHODS: Eight hundred and thirteen consecutive cases performed EBUS-TBNA with both cytological and histological diagnoses were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were followed up for clinical data. RESULTS: Before immunohistochemical examination, the cytological sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of EBUS-TBNAs were 92.9% (421/453), 98.9% (348/352), 95.5% (769/805), respectively. After immunohistochemical examination, the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were 93.0% (423/455), 99.4% (348/350), 95.8% (771/805), respectively. The majority of false-negative were cases whose cytological diagnosis was "atypical" or the cytological diagnosis suggested "inadequate." "Neoplastic" were also prone to false-negative cytology. The diagnostic accordance rate of cytological subtyping was 90.3% for squamous-cell carcinoma, 99.2% for adenocarcinoma, and 98.1% for small-cell carcinoma before immunohistochemical examination, and became 85.9%, 98.5%, and 98.2% after immunohistochemical examination, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cytological diagnosis in EBUS-TBNAs had a good sensitivity and high specificity. The sensitivity and specificity of cytological diagnosis were proved to be higher after the immunohistochemical examination. At the same time, cytology had high accordance rate in subtype diagnosis. False-negative results occurred more commonly in cases whose cytological diagnosis was "atypical" or the cytological diagnosis suggested "inadequate" or the corresponding histological diagnosis was "Neoplastic."
Authors: Mariam Alsharif; Rafael S Andrade; Shawn S Groth; Edward B Stelow; Stefan E Pambuccian Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: William D Travis; Elisabeth Brambilla; Masayuki Noguchi; Andrew G Nicholson; Kim R Geisinger; Yasushi Yatabe; David G Beer; Charles A Powell; Gregory J Riely; Paul E Van Schil; Kavita Garg; John H M Austin; Hisao Asamura; Valerie W Rusch; Fred R Hirsch; Giorgio Scagliotti; Tetsuya Mitsudomi; Rudolf M Huber; Yuichi Ishikawa; James Jett; Montserrat Sanchez-Cespedes; Jean-Paul Sculier; Takashi Takahashi; Masahiro Tsuboi; Johan Vansteenkiste; Ignacio Wistuba; Pan-Chyr Yang; Denise Aberle; Christian Brambilla; Douglas Flieder; Wilbur Franklin; Adi Gazdar; Michael Gould; Philip Hasleton; Douglas Henderson; Bruce Johnson; David Johnson; Keith Kerr; Keiko Kuriyama; Jin Soo Lee; Vincent A Miller; Iver Petersen; Victor Roggli; Rafael Rosell; Nagahiro Saijo; Erik Thunnissen; Ming Tsao; David Yankelewitz Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Masaki Anraku; Andrew F Pierre; Takahiro Nakajima; Marc de Perrot; Gail E Darling; Thomas K Waddell; Shaf Keshavjee; Kazuhiro Yasufuku Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: José Sanz-Santos; Pere Serra; Felipe Andreo; Maria Llatjós; Eva Castellà; Eduard Monsó Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2012-01-21 Impact factor: 4.430