Search

* Context.--In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types. Objective.--To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commonly used nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories. Design.--Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee and distributed to participants in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing. Results.--Nongynecologic reporting systems with the highest rate of adoption were the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology, 2nd edition (74.1%; 552 of 745); the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (53.9%; 397 of 736); and the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (29.1%; 200 of 688). The most common reason given for not adopting a reporting system was satisfaction with a laboratory's current system. Implementation varied among laboratories with regard to which stakeholders were involved in deciding to implement a system and the amount of education provided during the implementation process. Conclusions.--The implementation of nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories was highly variable., A shared language and framework of understanding are central components to the effective and safe practice of medicine. Although cytopathology shares some of the same language as histopathology, cytopathology specimens [...]

This report highlights information and outcomes from the November 2022 ASC/IAC joint Cytology Education Symposium, an annual conference organized by the Cytology Programs Review Committee. The manuscript provides information on shared educational opportunities and practices for cytology students and other learners in anatomic pathology, discusses recruitment strategies for schools of cytology, conveys teaching resources, introduces perspectives on virtual microscopy and online learning, and transmits information about wellness of students in schools of cytology. This report highlights information and outcomes from the November 2022 ASC/IAC joint Cytology Education Symposium. Emphasis is placed on: • Common education for CT students, pathology residents and cytopathology fellows • Recruitment strategies • Teaching resources • Virtual microscopy, simulation and online learning • Wellness [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report highlights information and outcomes from the November 2022 ASC/IAC joint Cytology Education Symposium, an annual conference organized by the Cytology Programs Review Committee. The manuscript provides information on shared educational opportunities and practices for cytology students and other learners in anatomic pathology, discusses recruitment strategies for schools of cytology, conveys teaching resources, introduces perspectives on virtual microscopy and online learning, and transmits information about wellness of students in schools of cytology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context.--: Cytologic-histologic correlation (CHC) is a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-mandated requirement for gynecologic cytology, but no similar requirement exists for nongynecologic cytology. This study presents the findings from a College of American Pathologists survey of nongynecologic cytology practice patterns. Objective.--: To survey the current CHC practices for nongynecologic cytology. Design.--: Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the committee and distributed to participants in the Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing. Results.--: Adoption of CHC for nongynecologic cytology cases is worldwide, with 88.5% of institutions performing CHC on these specimens, a substantial increase from previous years. Performance of CHC varied by institution type, with clinic or regional/local independent laboratories and national/corporate laboratories performing CHC significantly less frequently than hospitals, university hospitals/academic medical centers, and Veterans Administration/Department of Defense hospital institutions. Most CHC was performed concurrently in real time, when the corresponding surgical specimen was reviewed. Selection for real-time concurrent CHC was by the interpreting pathologist, the pathologist diagnosing the surgical biopsy sample or cytopathology case, or both. Sampling was by far the most common reason for discordance. A 2-step difference was the most frequent threshold for discordance between cytology and surgical specimens, but this criterion varied among institutions, with no majority definition. The positive predictive value of a positive cytology finding was calculated rarely in North American institutions but was calculated more frequently in international institutions. Conclusions.--: CHC practices for nongynecologic cytopathology mirror those found for CHC of gynecologic cytopathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Sclerosing pneumocytoma (SP) is a rare benign tumor and a potential diagnostic pitfall. Our aim was to review the cytologic features of our surgically diagnosed SP cases including the clinical, immunohistochemical and available molecular findings., Materials and Methods: A computerized search from 2013 to 2020 for surgical cases with corresponding cytology specimens diagnosed as SP was performed. The clinical data, cytology, and surgical specimens were collated for analysis., Results: Six cytology specimens were collected. All were female (mean age = 35). Three have incidental lung nodules and three with cough. Cytologic findings showed variable architectural pattern (papillary, solid, singly scattered, acinar/rosette-like) and cellular heterogeneity (surface, stromal, epithelioid, plasmacytoid cells). Atypia was identified in 4/6 cases. The original cytology diagnoses were negative = 1, SP = 2 and adenocarcinoma = 3. The latter diagnoses were amended to SP after review of the surgical specimens. The three false positive cases on review have cytologic features mimicking adenocarcinoma. Immunohistochemical stains showed tumor cells (surface and stromal) were positive for TTF-1, and EMA with only the surface cells positive for pancytokeratin and Napsin A. Though two cases sent for molecular testing were negative for AKT1 or CTNNB1 exon 3 mutation, our panel did not evaluate AKT1 exon 4., Conclusions: SP is a diagnostic pitfall with 50% initially misdiagnosed as adenocarcinoma. Integrating the clinical/radiologic findings, cytologic features, and performance of immunohistochemistry on cell block are helpful in avoiding misdiagnosis. Molecular testing for recurrent mutations, if present, could be helpful for diagnosis and possible therapy options. However, routinely used molecular testing may not always capture relevant molecular markers for SP., (© 2024 The Author(s). Diagnostic Cytopathology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)