Pancreatic cytopathology: a practical approach and review.

Department of Pathology, Universityof Virginia Health System, Charlottesville,VA 22908, USA.
Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (Impact Factor: 2.88). 04/2009; 133(3):388-404. DOI: 10.1043/1543-2165-133.3.388
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Pancreatic cytopathology plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of patients with solid and cystic lesions of the pancreas.
To serve as a practical guide to pancreatic cytopathology for the practicing pathologist. Data Sources.-A comprehensive assessment of the medical literature was performed.
We review pancreatic cytopathology, with specific discussions of its role in patient management, specimen types and specimen processing, specific diagnostic criteria, and the use of ancillary testing and advanced techniques.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has emerged as the diagnostic modality of choice for mass lesions in the pancreas. The objective of the current study was to determine the accuracy and pitfalls of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions in cases that involved follow-up surgical resection.METHODS Cases of EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions performed from 2007 to mid-2012 for which subsequent surgical resection was performed were retrieved from the department's database. The accuracy of the cytologic diagnosis was assessed using the histological diagnosis as the gold standard. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. “Neoplastic,” “suspicious,” and “malignant” were classified as a positive cytologic diagnosis. In one calculation method, “atypical” was also included as a positive cytologic diagnosis whereas in another it was not considered to be a positive cytological result. The cases with a cytologic-histological discrepancy were reviewed to identify sources of errors.RESULTSA total of 1212 cases from 1104 patients (518 women and 586 men; age range, 18-94 years [average age, 63.5 years]) were identified. Cytologic diagnoses included 52 unsatisfactory, 224 benign, 129 atypical, 140 neoplasm, 35 suspicious, and 632 malignant diagnoses. Of these cases, 397 patients had histological follow-up information available. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 83.2%, 85.9%, 95.9%, and 56.1%, respectively, with atypical cases excluded from the analysis. When atypical cases were included as a positive cytologic diagnosis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 86.7%, 67.9%, 90.7%, and 58.5%, respectively, and were 73.7%, 87.7%, 95.6%, and 48.0%, respectively, when atypical cases were included as a negative cytologic diagnosis. The major difficulty in EUS-FNA cytology was to differentiate pancreatic mucinous neoplasms from contaminants of gastric mucosa. Other pitfalls included differentiating mucinous neoplasm from extensive pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia, and endocrine tumor from nesidioblastosis versus acinar cell carcinoma or intrapancreatic spleen.CONCLUSIONSEUS-FNA is a valuable tool for the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions, especially solid malignant tumors. Cytologic-radiological correlation is essential in differentiating pancreatic mucinous neoplasms from gastric mucosa, because the former usually are found to have characteristic features on imaging. Pathologists should be aware of the pitfalls in the cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic lesions that may significantly change the clinical management of the patients. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2014. © 2014 American Cancer Society.
    Cancer Cytopathology 11/2014; DOI:10.1002/cncy.21497 · 3.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in evaluating pancreatic pathology has been well documented from the beginning of its clinical use. High spatial resolution and the close proximity to the evaluated organs within the mediastinum and abdominal cavity allow detection of small focal lesions and precise tissue acquisition from suspected lesions within the reach of this method. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) is considered of additional value to EUS and is performed to obtain tissue diagnosis. Tissue acquisition from suspected lesions for cytological or histological analysis allows, not only the differentiation between malignant and non-malignant lesions, but, in most cases, also the accurate distinction between the various types of malignant lesions. It is well documented that the best results are achieved only if an adequate sample is obtained for further analysis, if the material is processed in an appropriate way, and if adequate ancillary methods are performed. This is a multi-step process and could be quite a challenge in some cases. In this article, we discuss the technical aspects of tissue acquisition by EUS-guided-FNA (EUS-FNA), as well as the role of an on-site cytopathologist, various means of specimen processing, and the selection of the appropriate ancillary method for providing an accurate tissue diagnosis and maximizing the yield of this method. The main goal of this review is to alert endosonographers, not only to the different possibilities of tissue acquisition, namely EUS-FNA, but also to bring to their attention the importance of proper sample processing in the evaluation of various lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and other accessible organs. All aspects of tissue acquisition (needles, suction, use of stylet, complications, etc.) have been well discussed lately. Adequate tissue samples enable comprehensive diagnoses, which answer the main clinical questions, thus enabling targeted therapy.
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 10/2014; 20(39):14292-14300. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i39.14292 · 2.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The cell block (CB) is a routine procedure in cytopathology that has gained importance because of its pivotal role in diagnosis and ancillary studies. There is no precise review in the published literature that deals with the various methods of preparation of CB, its utility in diagnosis, immunocytochemistry (ICC) or molecular testing, and its drawbacks. An extensive literature search on CB in cytology using internet search engines was performed for this review employing the following keywords: cell block, cytoblock, cytology, cytopathology, methods, preparation, fixatives, diagnostic yield, ancillary and molecular studies. Ever since its introduction more than a century ago, the CB technique has undergone numerous modifications to improve the quality of the procedure; however, the overall principle remains the same in each method. CBs can be prepared from virtually all varieties of cytological samples. In today's era of personalized medicine, cytological specimens, including CBs, augment the utility of cytological samples in analysing the molecular alterations as effectively as surgical biopsies or resection specimens. With the availability of molecular targeted therapy for many cancers, a large number of recent studies have used cytological material or CBs for molecular characterization. The various techniques of CB preparation with different fixatives, their advantages and limitations, and issues of diagnostic yield are discussed in this review.
    Cytopathology 08/2014; DOI:10.1111/cyt.12174 · 1.47 Impact Factor