Endocervical Cytology: Inter- and Intra-Observer Variability in Conventional Pap Smears

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PATHOLOGY Acta Cytologica Pub Date : 2022-02-28 DOI:10.1159/000522212
Johanna Pulkkinen, H. Huhtala, L. Krogerus, S. Hollmén, Marita Laurila, I. Kholová
{"title":"Endocervical Cytology: Inter- and Intra-Observer Variability in Conventional Pap Smears","authors":"Johanna Pulkkinen, H. Huhtala, L. Krogerus, S. Hollmén, Marita Laurila, I. Kholová","doi":"10.1159/000522212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Although the cytological diagnostic criteria for cervical squamous and glandular lesions are established by the Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, the reproducibility of the diagnosis of these lesions has been shown to be variable in previous studies. At best, occasional good kappa (κ) values were reached both inter- and intra-observerly. Generally, consensus on high-grade lesions has been better compared to milder changes. Methods: Altogether, 167 conventional Pap smears from 50 patients with histologically confirmed endocervical adenocarcinomas (EAC) and adenocarcinomas in situ (AIS) and from 28 patients with histologically proven high-grade intraepithelial lesions were analyzed by four cytopathologists. Twenty of the smears were later re-evaluated by the same cytopathologists. κ-values between cytopathologists in the categories of squamous versus glandular, negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), atypical, and preneoplastic/neoplastic were calculated. The diagnostic Pap smears of EAC and AIS with best and worst consensus between observers were then morphologically analyzed. Results: The reproducibility ranged from poor to substantial. The overall κ-values between the four cytopathologists were 0.412, 0.314, 0.272, and 0.082, respectively, in the categories of preneoplastic/neoplastic, squamous versus glandular, NILM, and atypical. Overall intra-observer κ-values were correspondingly 0.491, 0.616, 0.345, and 0.241. In the diagnostic smears of AIS and EAC, the nuclear size >2 times the normal and nuclear pleomorphism were the commonest features associated with good diagnostic consensus and the lack of nuclear enlargement and degenerative changes were associated with poor consensus. Conclusions: The reproducibility of preneoplasia/neoplasia diagnoses was better than that of atypia and NILM both in the inter- and intra-observer part in this study. In the smears from AIS and EAC patients, general neoplasia-associated features were more common in samples with good agreement by the four cytopathologists of the neoplastic nature and the endocervical origin of the lesion.","PeriodicalId":6959,"journal":{"name":"Acta Cytologica","volume":"66 1","pages":"206 - 215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Cytologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000522212","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: Although the cytological diagnostic criteria for cervical squamous and glandular lesions are established by the Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, the reproducibility of the diagnosis of these lesions has been shown to be variable in previous studies. At best, occasional good kappa (κ) values were reached both inter- and intra-observerly. Generally, consensus on high-grade lesions has been better compared to milder changes. Methods: Altogether, 167 conventional Pap smears from 50 patients with histologically confirmed endocervical adenocarcinomas (EAC) and adenocarcinomas in situ (AIS) and from 28 patients with histologically proven high-grade intraepithelial lesions were analyzed by four cytopathologists. Twenty of the smears were later re-evaluated by the same cytopathologists. κ-values between cytopathologists in the categories of squamous versus glandular, negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), atypical, and preneoplastic/neoplastic were calculated. The diagnostic Pap smears of EAC and AIS with best and worst consensus between observers were then morphologically analyzed. Results: The reproducibility ranged from poor to substantial. The overall κ-values between the four cytopathologists were 0.412, 0.314, 0.272, and 0.082, respectively, in the categories of preneoplastic/neoplastic, squamous versus glandular, NILM, and atypical. Overall intra-observer κ-values were correspondingly 0.491, 0.616, 0.345, and 0.241. In the diagnostic smears of AIS and EAC, the nuclear size >2 times the normal and nuclear pleomorphism were the commonest features associated with good diagnostic consensus and the lack of nuclear enlargement and degenerative changes were associated with poor consensus. Conclusions: The reproducibility of preneoplasia/neoplasia diagnoses was better than that of atypia and NILM both in the inter- and intra-observer part in this study. In the smears from AIS and EAC patients, general neoplasia-associated features were more common in samples with good agreement by the four cytopathologists of the neoplastic nature and the endocervical origin of the lesion.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宫颈细胞学:常规巴氏涂片中观察者间和观察者内的变异性
导读:虽然宫颈鳞状和腺状病变的细胞学诊断标准是由Bethesda宫颈细胞学报告系统建立的,但在以往的研究中,这些病变诊断的可重复性显示为可变的。在最好的情况下,偶尔良好的kappa (κ)值在观察者之间和观察者内部都达到了。一般来说,高度病变的共识优于轻度病变。方法:4名细胞病理学家对50例经组织学证实的宫颈内腺癌(EAC)和原位腺癌(AIS)患者和28例经组织学证实的高级别上皮内病变患者的167例常规巴氏涂片进行分析。20份涂片随后由相同的细胞病理学家重新评估。计算细胞病理学家在鳞状与腺状、上皮内病变或恶性(NILM)阴性、非典型和癌前/癌前病变类别中的κ-值。然后对EAC和AIS的诊断性巴氏涂片进行形态学分析,观察者之间的最佳和最差共识。结果:重现性由差到好。四名细胞病理学家在癌前/肿瘤、鳞状与腺状、NILM和非典型等类别中的总体κ值分别为0.412、0.314、0.272和0.082。总体观察者内κ值分别为0.491、0.616、0.345和0.241。在AIS和EAC的诊断涂片中,核大小为正常的2倍,核多形性是诊断一致性较好的常见特征,而没有核扩大和退行性改变的诊断一致性较差。结论:在本研究中,在观察组间和观察组内,瘤前病变/瘤变诊断的可重复性优于异型性和NILM诊断。在AIS和EAC患者的涂片中,一般肿瘤相关特征在样本中更为常见,四名细胞病理学家对肿瘤性质和病变的宫颈内起源有很好的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Cytologica
Acta Cytologica 生物-病理学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
11.10%
发文量
46
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: With articles offering an excellent balance between clinical cytology and cytopathology, ''Acta Cytologica'' fosters the understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms behind cytomorphology and thus facilitates the translation of frontline research into clinical practice. As the official journal of the International Academy of Cytology and affiliated to over 50 national cytology societies around the world, ''Acta Cytologica'' evaluates new and existing diagnostic applications of scientific advances as well as their clinical correlations. Original papers, review articles, meta-analyses, novel insights from clinical practice, and letters to the editor cover topics from diagnostic cytopathology, gynecologic and non-gynecologic cytopathology to fine needle aspiration, molecular techniques and their diagnostic applications. As the perfect reference for practical use, ''Acta Cytologica'' addresses a multidisciplinary audience practicing clinical cytopathology, cell biology, oncology, interventional radiology, otorhinolaryngology, gastroenterology, urology, pulmonology and preventive medicine.
期刊最新文献
Reclassification of Urinary Cytology according to the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology Correlation with Histological Diagnosis. Cytopathology of a Newly Described Salivary Gland Neoplasm: A Case Report of Microsecretory Adenocarcinoma Presenting in the Parotid Gland. Does the Diagnostic Performance of the Pathologist on the Indeterminate Categories of the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology Vary between Pediatric and Adult Patients? Evaluation of a Cytology-Molecular Co-Test in Liquid-Based Cytology-Processed Urine for Defining Indeterminate Categories of the Paris System. Diagnostic and Predictive Immunocytochemistry in Lung Cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1