Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Application of the newly published International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology in atypical and suspicious diagnosis: a four-year retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Serous fluids offer crucial diagnostic insights, but inconsistent analysis hampers reporting quality, especially in indeterminate (ID) categories like atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) and suspicious for malignancy (SFM). The 2020 International System for reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology (TIS) aims to standardize communication and reduce reporting disparities. This study evaluates TIS's role in AUS and SFM categories within our institution.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 4-year retrospective search of cytopathology reports from December 2015 to December 2019 for AUS and SFM diagnoses in pleural, ascitic, pericardial fluids, and peritoneal washings was performed and results reclassified using TIS definitions. The risk of malignancy (ROM) was calculated for existing and reclassified diagnoses.

RESULTS: Over 4 years, we received 2998 serous fluid specimens. AUS constituted 2.3% (70 cases), while SFM constituted 0.5% (16 cases). Excluding repeats, 80 cases were TIS-reviewed. Sixteen cases of ID diagnoses were reclassified. Two cases of AUS were changed to negative for malignancy (NFM) and 12 to SFM. Two SFM cases were upgraded to malignancy. ROM shifted from 63% to 60% for AUS and 100% to 85% for SF (TIS's ROM range: AUS: 66% ± 10%; SFM: 82% ± 4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS: This institution's ID diagnosis rate is low. AUS ROM is challenging but aligns with TIS, primarily favoring benign. All SFM diagnoses are highly suspicious but quantitatively inadequate for definitive malignancy, explaining the elevated ROM. AUS rate should gauge quality, not serve as a catch-all category. Algorithmic cytology with cell blocks and ancillary studies aids reclassification. TIS is user-friendly and is a consistent methodology for standardized reporting. Further studies are needed to evaluate ROM and define reproducible diagnostic criteria for each category for better system utilization.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app