Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytopathology: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies.
Jamal, Fatima E; Vey, Johannes A; Proctor, Tanja; Ishak, Angela; Schmitt, Fernando C; Nikas, Ilias P.
Afiliação
  • Jamal FE; School of Medicine, European University Cyprus.
  • Vey JA; Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Proctor T; Institute of Medical Biometry, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Ishak A; School of Medicine, European University Cyprus.
  • Schmitt FC; Department of Internal Medicine, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI.
  • Nikas IP; IPATIMUP, Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of University of Porto.
Adv Anat Pathol ; 31(4): 256-264, 2024 Jul 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38695284
ABSTRACT
This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of The International System (TIS) for reporting serous fluid cytopathology. Our aims were to present the pooled malignancy rate of each TIS reporting category and the diagnostic accuracy of cytology using this system. Database search using a predefined strategy was followed by study selection, data extraction, study quality assessment, and statistical analysis. Data derived from 16 eligible studies were pooled. The pooled rates of malignancy were as follows 27% (95% CI; 16%-41%) for "nondiagnostic" (ND), 11% (95% CI; 7%-18%) for negative for malignancy" (NFM), 49% (95% CI; 37%-61%) for "atypia of undetermined significance" (AUS), 90% (95% CI; 81%-95%) for "suspicious for malignancy" (SFM), and 100% (95% CI; 98%-100%) for "positive for malignancy" (MAL). Studies performed exclusively in cancer hospitals showed higher pooled malignancy rates, compared with academic and community hospitals serving the general population, in the ND [40% (95% CI; 21%-62%) vs. 22% (95% CI; 11%-39%)], NFM [20% (95% CI; 13%-30%) vs. 9% (95% CI; 5%-17%)], and AUS categories [55% (95% CI; 47%-63%) vs. 46% (95% CI; 31%-62%)]. Notably, the difference was significant in the NFM category ( P =0.04). When both SFM and MAL cytology interpretations were considered as malignant outcomes, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 68.74% (95% CI; 59.90%-76.39%) and 98.81% (95% CI; 98.18%-99.22%), respectively. In addition, the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was found to be 170.7 (95% CI; 96.2-303.3). Despite its strengths, our study also had some limitations. Therefore, future large-scale longitudinal studies could strengthen the findings of this review.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Citodiagnóstico Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Adv Anat Pathol Assunto da revista: ANATOMIA / PATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Citodiagnóstico Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Adv Anat Pathol Assunto da revista: ANATOMIA / PATOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article