Fine‐needle aspiration biopsy of salivary glands

Abstract

Between January 1, 1973, and December 31, 1988, the authors or their associates performed 552 fine-needle aspiration biopsies on patients with clinically significant masses of the salivary glands. All patients presented at the Medical College of Virginia Hospitals or Clinics of Virginia Commonwealth University; they were followed for periods ranging from 1 to 16 years. When available, the fine-needle aspiration diagnoses were correlated with histologic diagnoses and long-term patient outcomes. The sensitivity for a neoplasm was 93.3%; the specificity for the absence of a neoplasm was 99%. Diagnostic efficiency was 96.4%, and predictive value of a positive aspiration for a neoplasm was 98.3%. With fine-needle aspiration, surgical excision of salivary gland masses is often unnecessary. In patients with primary and metastatic neoplasms involving the salivary glands, fine-needle aspiration aids the surgeon in mapping the extent of the surgical procedure and in preoperatively preparing the patient. The procedure is cost-effective.

Accuracy of Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Salivary Gland Lesions: Routine Diagnostic Experience in Bangkok, Thailand

“…In our study, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of preoperative FNA cytology of salivary gland lesions were 97%, 81.3 %, 99.1%, 92.9%, and 97.5% respectively, indicating good results compared with those previously reported from other institutions (O'Dwyer et al, 1986;Frable & Frable, 1991;Chan et al, 1992;Zurrida et al, 1993;Al-Khafaji et al, 1998;Boccato et al, 1998;Mihashi et al, 2006;Tan & Koo, 2006). Nevertheless, other studies have reported wide variation in sensitivity and specificity of FNA cytology of salivary gland in detecting malignant tumors, ranging from 29% to 97% and 84% to 100%, respectively (reviewed in Cohen et al, 2004).…”

“…In our institution, FNA is routinely used as a practical method et al, 1997; Cristallini et al, 1997;Frable & Frable, 1991;Chan et al, 1992;Das et al, 2004, Mihashi et al, 2006.…”

“…Previous studies reported the diagnostic performance of FNA in salivary gland lesions; the sensitivity was in the range of 62-100%; specificity of 86-100% and accuracy of 77-98.2% respectively (O'Dwyer et al, 1986;Frable & Frable, 1991;Chan et al, 1992;Zurrida et al, 1993;Al-Khafaji et al, 1998;Boccato et al, 1998;Mihashi et a., 2006;Tan & Koo, 2006). It is widely used in America, Europe and Asia (Layfield et al, 1987;Frable and Frable, 1991;Chan et al, 1992;Zurrida et al, 1993;Stanley et al, 1995;Al-Khafaji et al, 1998;Mihashi et al, 2006;Tan & Koo, 2006). Nevertheless, this procedure has been questioned for the diagnostic value in management of salivary gland tumors and may not cost-effective in routine cytology work for every patient (Batsakis et al, 1992;Tan & Koo, 2006).…”

“…It has been used to differentiate nonneoplastic lesions from neoplasms, and benign from malignant neoplasms (Frable & Frable, 1991;Cristallini et al, 1997;Al-Khafaji et al, 1998). It is a safe, simple, cost-effective, accurate and minimal invasive for evaluation salivary gland lesions (Frable & Frable, 1991;Layfield & Glasgow, 1991;Cajulis et al, 1997;Buley & Roskell, 2000).…”

“…It has been used to differentiate nonneoplastic lesions from neoplasms, and benign from malignant neoplasms (Frable & Frable, 1991;Cristallini et al, 1997;Al-Khafaji et al, 1998). It is a safe, simple, cost-effective, accurate and minimal invasive for evaluation salivary gland lesions (Frable & Frable, 1991;Layfield & Glasgow, 1991;Cajulis et al, 1997;Buley & Roskell, 2000). It is not only useful in planning definitive preoperative diagnosis Sudarat Nguansangiam*, Somnuek Jesdapatarakul, Nisarat Dhanarak, Krittika Sosrisakorn but also can prevent unnecessary surgery procedures (Qizilbash et al, 1985;Layfield et al, 1987;Layfield & Glasgow, 1991;Stanley et al, 1995;Zhang et al, 2009).…”