Email this article 
Post a Comment Informative significance of morphological methods for diagnosis of tumor processes
- Authors: Bulatova I.A.1, Paducheva S.V.2
-
Affiliations:
- E.A. Vagner Perm State Medical University
- City Clinical Hospital №2 named after F.Kh. Gral
- Issue: Vol 37, No 4 (2020)
- Pages: 85-90
- Section: Methods of diagnosis and technologies
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/PMJ/article/view/49762
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/pmj37485-90
- ID: 49762
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Objective. To assess the comparability of the cytological and histological studies of material of different localizations.
Materials and methods. The work is based on the analysis of results of cytological and histological studies in 48 patients examined at Perm Regional Oncological Dispensary in 2019.
Results. It was established that out of 22 mammary punctates, diagnosis of “cancer” was confirmed in 20 patients with coincidence validity criterion of 91 %. Out of 14 preparations of skin, 13 cases were histologically confirmed that constituted 92.8 %. When studying the lymph node punctate, one mismatch was detected. Out of 6 thyroid punctates, there were 5 confirmed ones. Percentage of false-positive cytological conclusions was on average 7 %, false-negative – 1 %.
Conclusions. Comparability of cytological and histological studies according to the results of data analysis ranged from 50 to 100 % depending on localization and was on average 91.6 %.
Keywords
Full Text
##article.viewOnOriginalSite##About the authors
I. A. Bulatova
E.A. Vagner Perm State Medical University
Author for correspondence.
Email: bula.1977@mail.ru
MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Faculty Therapy №2 of Professional Pathology and Clinical Laboratory Diagnostics
Russian Federation, PermS. V. Paducheva
City Clinical Hospital №2 named after F.Kh. Gral
Email: bula.1977@mail.ru
Candidate of Medical Sciences, Head of Clinical Diagnostic Laboratory
Russian Federation, PermReferences
- Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2018 (morbidity and mortality). Edited by A.D. Kaprina, V.V. Starinskogo, G.V. Petrovoy. Moscow: MNIOI them. P.A. Herzen – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology of the Ministry of Health of Russia 2019; 250 (in Russian).
- Volchenko N.N., Polonskaya N.Yu. Cytological method in the diagnosis of tumors and tumor-like processes. Clinical Cytology News from Russia 2018; 22 (1–2): 23–29 (in Russian).
- Kronz J.D., Westra W.H., Epstein J.I. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital. Cancer 1999; 86 (11): 2426–2435.
- Santoso J.T., Coleman R.L., Voet R.L. et al. Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91: 730–734.
- Selman A.E., Niemann T.H., Fowler J.M., Copeland LJ. Quality assurance of second opinion pathology in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94 (2): 302–306.
- Chan Y.M., Cheung A.N., Cheng D.K. et al. Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology: routine or selective? Gynecol Oncol 1999; 75: 267–271.
- Hamady Z.Z., Mather N., Lansdown M.R. et al. Surgical pathological second opinion in thyroid malignancy: impact on patients’ management and prognosis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2005; 31 (1): 74–77.
- Fedyanin M.Yu. A clinical oncologist's perspective. How will morphological examination of tumors of the colon and genitourinary system affect the tactics of treatment? Malignant tumors 2018; 8 (3s1): 96–104 (in Russian).
Supplementary files
