Verifying a novel bile cytology scoring system

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Chie Hayakawa CT, IAC, Masahiro Hoshikawa MD, Johji Imura MD, FIAC, Takahiko Ueno PhD, Junki Koike MD
{"title":"Verifying a novel bile cytology scoring system","authors":"Chie Hayakawa CT, IAC,&nbsp;Masahiro Hoshikawa MD,&nbsp;Johji Imura MD, FIAC,&nbsp;Takahiko Ueno PhD,&nbsp;Junki Koike MD","doi":"10.1002/dc.25358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The scoring system for bile cytology (SSBC) aims to improve bile cytology diagnostic accuracy. Here, the practicality of SSBC was verified by multiple cytotechnologists.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Bile cytological specimens were evaluated by 24 cytotechnologists using SSBC. The samples were assessed before using the SSBC (first-time assessment) according to three categories: benign, indeterminate, and malignant. A first scoring evaluation (FSE) was then performed using SSBC; each item in the scoring system was classified as present or absent. After distributing an instruction sheet with diagnostic criteria, a second scoring evaluation (SSE) was performed using SSBC. Each method was evaluated using diagnostic accuracy and interobserver and intraobserver agreement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Several samples were assessed as indeterminate in the first-time assessment. Although the specificity of the SSE improved, the sensitivity and accuracy decreased compared with those of the FSE. The overall interobserver agreement was fair for all parameters, including abnormal chromatin, irregular internuclear distances, irregularly overlapped nuclei, irregular cluster margins, and final evaluation in the FSE and SSE. The final evaluation by histological type exhibited slight agreement for well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma and almost perfect agreement for poorly differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma in the FSE and SSE. For moderately differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma, agreement was moderate in the FSE and fair in the SSE. For cholangitis, a slight agreement was observed in the FSE, which improved to fair in the SSE.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Although the SSBC is expected to improve specificity, there exists ambiguity regarding SSBC criteria and interindividual assessment differences. Therefore, the objective assessment method should be revised.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11349,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic Cytopathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dc.25358","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The scoring system for bile cytology (SSBC) aims to improve bile cytology diagnostic accuracy. Here, the practicality of SSBC was verified by multiple cytotechnologists.

Methods

Bile cytological specimens were evaluated by 24 cytotechnologists using SSBC. The samples were assessed before using the SSBC (first-time assessment) according to three categories: benign, indeterminate, and malignant. A first scoring evaluation (FSE) was then performed using SSBC; each item in the scoring system was classified as present or absent. After distributing an instruction sheet with diagnostic criteria, a second scoring evaluation (SSE) was performed using SSBC. Each method was evaluated using diagnostic accuracy and interobserver and intraobserver agreement.

Results

Several samples were assessed as indeterminate in the first-time assessment. Although the specificity of the SSE improved, the sensitivity and accuracy decreased compared with those of the FSE. The overall interobserver agreement was fair for all parameters, including abnormal chromatin, irregular internuclear distances, irregularly overlapped nuclei, irregular cluster margins, and final evaluation in the FSE and SSE. The final evaluation by histological type exhibited slight agreement for well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma and almost perfect agreement for poorly differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma in the FSE and SSE. For moderately differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma, agreement was moderate in the FSE and fair in the SSE. For cholangitis, a slight agreement was observed in the FSE, which improved to fair in the SSE.

Conclusions

Although the SSBC is expected to improve specificity, there exists ambiguity regarding SSBC criteria and interindividual assessment differences. Therefore, the objective assessment method should be revised.

验证新型胆汁细胞学评分系统
背景:胆汁细胞学评分系统(SSBC)旨在提高胆汁细胞学诊断的准确性。在此,多名细胞技术专家对 SSBC 的实用性进行了验证:方法:24 位细胞技术专家使用 SSBC 对胆汁细胞学标本进行评估。样本在使用 SSBC 之前按照良性、不确定和恶性三个类别进行评估(首次评估)。然后使用 SSBC 进行首次评分评估(FSE);评分系统中的每个项目都被划分为存在或不存在。在分发了包含诊断标准的说明单后,使用 SSBC 进行了第二次评分评估(SSE)。对每种方法的诊断准确性以及观察者之间和观察者内部的一致性进行了评估:结果:有几个样本在第一次评估中被评为不确定样本。与 FSE 相比,虽然 SSE 的特异性有所提高,但灵敏度和准确性却有所下降。在所有参数方面,包括染色质异常、核间距离不规则、核重叠不规则、核团边缘不规则以及 FSE 和 SSE 的最终评估,观察者之间的总体一致性尚可。在 FSE 和 SSE 中,按组织学类型进行的最终评估对分化良好的管状腺癌显示出轻微的一致性,而对分化不良的管状腺癌则显示出几乎完全的一致性。对于中度分化的肾小管腺癌,在 FSE 中的一致性为中等,在 SSE 中的一致性为一般。至于胆管炎,在 FSE 中观察到轻微的一致性,而在 SSE 中则改善为一般:尽管 SSBC 可望提高特异性,但 SSBC 标准和个体间评估差异仍存在不确定性。因此,应修订客观评估方法。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Diagnostic Cytopathology
Diagnostic Cytopathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Diagnostic Cytopathology is intended to provide a forum for the exchange of information in the field of cytopathology, with special emphasis on the practical, clinical aspects of the discipline. The editors invite original scientific articles, as well as special review articles, feature articles, and letters to the editor, from laboratory professionals engaged in the practice of cytopathology. Manuscripts are accepted for publication on the basis of scientific merit, practical significance, and suitability for publication in a journal dedicated to this discipline. Original articles can be considered only with the understanding that they have never been published before and that they have not been submitted for simultaneous review to another publication.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信