Show simple item record

How important is on-site adequacy assessment for thyroid FNA? An evaluation of 883 cases

dc.contributor.authorZhu, Weijianen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichael, Claire W.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2007-09-20T18:22:01Z
dc.date.available2008-04-03T18:53:11Zen_US
dc.date.issued2007-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationZhu, Weijian; Michael, Claire W. (2007). "How important is on-site adequacy assessment for thyroid FNA? An evaluation of 883 cases." Diagnostic Cytopathology 35(3): 183-186. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/55982>en_US
dc.identifier.issn8755-1039en_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-0339en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/55982
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17304536&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractImmediate adequacy assessment (IADA) during fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is not universal and the optimal numberof passes has not been well determined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the nondiagnostic rates (NDR) with and without the IADA forthyroid aspirates. Subsequent cytological and surgical follow-upwere reviewed for nondiagnostic cases. In addition, we evaluated the numberof passes performed in each FNA to determine the optimal number. Retrospective analysis of NDR was performed on 883 thyroid FNA specimens retrievedthrough a Computer SNOMED Search from our files between January 2001 toDecember 2003. For FNAs with IADA, one Diff-Quick and one fixedsmear for each pass were prepared, and the needle was rinsed in CytoLytsolution for a ThinPrep and/or a cell-block. FNAs without IADAwere received in CytoLyt solution, from which a ThinPrep and a cell-block were prepared for each case. Of the total 883 cases, 443 wereperformed with IADA, of which 417 cases were diagnostic. The remaining440 cases were performed without IADA, of which 300 cases were diagnostic.NDR for IADA was 5.9% (26 cases-group-I)compared to 31.8% (140 cases-group-II)without IADA. In group-I, 5 cases were followed-upby repeat FNA, 10 cases by surgical resection, and 11 cases received notissue follow-up. In group-II, 23 cases were followed-up by repeat FNA, 36 by surgical resection, and 82 cases received notissue follow-up. Interestingly, follow-up in group-Idid not reveal any missed malignancy, while that in group-II resultedin a malignant diagnosis in 13.8% (8 cases). We alsofound that the optimal number of passes with least NDR was 4–6 passes.NDR was 25% for < 3 passes, 11% for 4 passes, 5.2% for 5 passes, 1.4% for 6 passes, and 2.5% for 7 passesor more. IADA significantly reduces the NDR and increases the sample adequacy for diagnosis. Optimal number of passes is 4–6 passes, and additionalpasses did not improve the diagnostic rate. Our study also emphasizesthe significance of repeat FNA or histological follow-up for nondiagnostic cases, especially for those without IADA. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2007;35:183–186. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.en_US
dc.format.extent84849 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherLife and Medical Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherCancer Research, Oncology and Pathologyen_US
dc.titleHow important is on-site adequacy assessment for thyroid FNA? An evaluation of 883 casesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPathologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor, Michigan ; Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Hospitals, 1500 E Medical Center Drive, Room 2G332 University Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0054en_US
dc.identifier.pmid17304536en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55982/1/20552_ftp.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/dc.20552en_US
dc.identifier.sourceDiagnostic Cytopathologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.