Cytologic-Histologic Correlation Practices for Nongynecologic Cytology Specimens: A Survey by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee.
Lananh N Nguyen, Barbara A Crothers, Rhona J Souers, Güliz A Barkan, Jennifer Brainard, Aziza Nassar, Susan Rollins, Z Laura Tabatabai, Sana Tabbara, Benjamin Witt, Christine N Booth
{"title":"Cytologic-Histologic Correlation Practices for Nongynecologic Cytology Specimens: A Survey by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee.","authors":"Lananh N Nguyen, Barbara A Crothers, Rhona J Souers, Güliz A Barkan, Jennifer Brainard, Aziza Nassar, Susan Rollins, Z Laura Tabatabai, Sana Tabbara, Benjamin Witt, Christine N Booth","doi":"10.5858/arpa.2023-0140-CP","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context.—: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective.—: </strong>To survey the current CHC practices for nongynecologic cytology.</p><p><strong>Design.—: </strong>Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the committee and distributed to participants in the Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing.</p><p><strong>Results.—: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions.—: </strong>CHC practices for nongynecologic cytopathology mirror those found for CHC of gynecologic cytopathology.</p>","PeriodicalId":93883,"journal":{"name":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"871-879"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2023-0140-CP","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
