Several studies have shown that ultrasound guidance can serve as a valuable aid in improving the diagnostic yield of fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy of thyroid nodules. In this study, we evaluated the combined impact of ultrasound‐guidance, rapid on‐site evaluation of FNA specimens, and different cytologic preparations (fresh and alcohol‐fixed smears, Millipore filter) and staining methods (Diff‐Quik and Papanicolaou stains) on the diagnostic yield of thyroid FNA. Ultrasound‐guided FNA was performed on 282 patients (313 cases) between November 1997 and April 1999. The diagnostic categories included: benign (198 cases, 63.2%); indeterminate (42 cases, 13.4%); suspicious for follicular variant of papillary carcinoma (26 cases, 8.3%), malignant (32 cases, 10.1%); and nondiagnostic (15 cases, 5%). The nondiagnostic cases also included 6 cystic lesions without any solid component and 3 thyroid‐bed aspirations. After excluding these, the nondiagnostic rate was only 2%. Histological follow‐up was available in 77 (77/313) cases. The concordance rate between cytological and histological diagnosis was 100% in malignant, 67% in suspicious, and 56% in indeterminate cases. All cases with histologic follow‐up were selected to evaluate the independent diagnostic efficacy of each aforementioned cytologic staining method. A definite diagnosis could be made solely on the basis of air‐dried, Diff‐Quik‐stained preparations in 50 (65%), alcohol‐fixed, Papanicolaou stained smears in 68 (88%), and Millipore filter preparations in 70 (91%) cases. We conclude that ultrasound‐guided FNA combined with on‐site evaluation and different cytologic preparations can significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of thyroid FNA specimens. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2000;23:425–429. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

No abstract

There is considerable interobserver variation in the diagnosis of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion that involves mature squamous epithelium. Our aim was to evaluate the utility of MIB-1 immunostaining as an adjunct test to increase diagnostic accuracy. Consecutive cervical biopsies originally diagnosed as normal (n = 26) or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (n = 23) were reviewed by three pathologists to obtain a consensus diagnosis. MIB-1 immunostaining was performed, and positive staining was defined as a cluster of at least two stained nuclei in the upper two thirds of the epithelial thickness. Human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA detection was performed using a polymerase chain reaction assay. All cases were subsequently reclassified as low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or normal (NL) when two or three of three gold standard criteria were satisfied (LSIL gold standard criteria = consensus diagnosis of LSIL, HPV+, MIB-1+; NL gold standard criteria = consensus diagnosis of NL, HPV-, MIB-1-). Using the gold standard diagnoses, we have identified that 14 normal cases (36%) were originally overdiagnosed as LSIL, and one LSIL case (10%) was originally underdiagnosed as normal. All MIB-1-positive cases were HPV+ and identified as LSIL in the consensus review. All MIB-1-negative cases were NL by gold standard criteria. The sensitivity (1.0) and the specificity (1.0) of MIB-1 staining for identifying LSIL were superior to the sensitivity (0.9) and the specificity (0.8) of HPV testing. In conclusion, MIB-1 is a highly sensitive and specific marker for identifying low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and is helpful in verifying the diagnosis of equivocal cases.

Background: Recent studies have reported CD10 expression in myoepithelial cells (MEC) of the breast, supporting its use as a marker to help distinguish invasive breast carcinoma (IC) from ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Aim: To compare the effectiveness of CD10 with smooth muscle myosin heavy chain (SMMHC) in the detection of MEC in benign and malignant breast lesions. Methods: Histological material from 25 patients with DCIS and 21 with IC were immunostained for CD10 and SMMHC. Staining was scored on a scale of 0 to 3+ (0, no staining; 3+, intense) and the staining distribution was documented as focal, partial, or circumferential. Results: Uniform, 3+ circumferential CD10 and SMMHC staining of MEC was seen in normal breast ducts and lobules, and in ducts and acini involved in sclerosing adenosis and apocrine metaplasia. In an analysis of total ducts involved by DCIS, 3+ circumferential staining was seen in 65 of 366 ducts (17.7%) stained for CD10 versus 190 of 396 ducts (48%) stained for SMMHC. MEC were not detected immunohistochemically in 116 of 366 ducts (31.7%) with anti-CD10 and 50 of 396 (12.7%) with anti-SMMHC. In contrast, all ICs were negative for both CD10 and SMMHC. Focal background staining of stromal myofibroblasts was seen with both CD10 and SMMHC, but CD10 showed a higher rate of nonspecific staining of epithelial cells. Conclusion: Although CD10 can aid in the distinction between IC and DCIS, SMMHC is a more sensitive and specific marker of MEC and shows less heterogeneity of immunostaining patterns.

No abstract