Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Retrospective application of WHO reporting system for lung cytopathology with assessment of risk of malignancy.

INTRODUCTION: The recently introduced World Health Organization (WHO) Reporting System for Lung Cytopathology presents 5 diagnostic categories with corresponding risk of malignancy (ROM) and management protocols. This study uses the system to categorize our institutional respiratory tract cytology specimens, evaluating ROM and diagnostic accuracy for each category.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective analysis (May 2020 to August 2021), the following respiratory cytology specimens were classified based on the WHO categories: bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), bronchial wash/bronchial brushings (BB/BW), endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), sputum, biopsy imprint (BI), and endotracheal wash. Exclusions comprised pleural effusions and EBUS-TBNA from mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes. Correlation of cytologic and histopathologic diagnoses was performed to assess ROM collectively and individually.

RESULTS: A total of 1518 respiratory samples (BAL [968], BW/BB [380], EBUS-TBNA [42], FNAC [32], sputum [80], BI [11] and endotracheal wash [5]) of 1410 patients were screened, of which 522 cases (34.3%) had histopathologic correlation. One hundred forty-one cases (9.3%) were Insufficient/Inadequate/Non-Diagnostic (ND), 1221 (80.4%) were Benign (B), 3 (0.2%) were Atypical (A), 32 (2.1%) were Suspicious for malignancy (SM) and 121 (8.0%) were Malignant (M). The estimated ROM for each category was 49.2% for ND, 13.3% for B, 66.6% for A, 81.5% for SM and 92.7% for M. FNAC and EBUS-TBNA exhibited the highest sensitivity (100%) compared with BW/BB (66.3%). Specificity ranged from 96.8% to 100% across the samples, while diagnostic accuracy varied from 58.8% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS: Application of the WHO reporting system enhances standardized terminology, aiding clinicians in informed decision-making and improving patient care through accurate risk assessment of malignancy.

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