Home | About CytoJournalEditorial Board | Archived articles | Search CytoJ Articles | Subscribe | Peer review policies | CytoJournal Quiz Cases
  Reviewer corner | Author corner | OA Steward’s corner | CF member’s corner | Join as CF member | Manuscript submission | Open Access (OA) Advocacy
Home
CytoJournal All 'FULL TEXT' in HTML are FREE under "open access" charter of CytoJournal.
To login for downloading any PDF OR to request TOC (Table of Content) by e-mail, please click here
Home Email this page Print this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size Cytopathology Foundation
Navigate here
  Search
 
  
Resource links
 »  Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »  Article in PDF (446 KB)
 »  Citation Manager
 »  Access Statistics
 »  Reader Comments
 »  Email Alert *
 »  Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
 »  References
 »  Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3466    
    Printed30    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded20    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal

 


 
Browse articles
LETTER TO EDITOR
CytoJournal 2012,  9:2

Comparing endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration specimens with and without rapid on-site evaluation


Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Shadyside Hospital POB2, Suite 201 5150, Centre Avenue Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Date of Submission02-Dec-2011
Date of Acceptance14-Dec-2011
Date of Web Publication31-Jan-2012

Correspondence Address:
Sara E Monaco
Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Shadyside Hospital POB2, Suite 201 5150, Centre Avenue Pittsburgh, PA
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1742-6413.92414

Rights and Permissions



How to cite this article:
Monaco SE, Pantanowitz L, Khalbuss WE. Comparing endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration specimens with and without rapid on-site evaluation. CytoJournal 2012;9:2

How to cite this URL:
Monaco SE, Pantanowitz L, Khalbuss WE. Comparing endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration specimens with and without rapid on-site evaluation. CytoJournal [serial online] 2012 [cited 2017 Mar 27];9:2. Available from: http://www.cytojournal.com/text.asp?2012/9/1/2/92414


Sir,

We read with great interest the recent article by Carruth-Griffin et al. entitled "Utility of on-site evaluation of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration specimens" [1] and commend the authors on a well-written paper, which addresses an important and timely topic of interest to cytologists evaluating these specimens. We would like to share our institution's experience as it relates to the use of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) in the clinical decision-making process for endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA) cases, because our experience has been different and likely reflects different institutional practices.

With regard to clinical decision making at the time of ROSE, the impact of the ROSE may depend on who is performing the FNA. The authors of this recent study state that the EBUS-FNAs were performed mainly by clinicians/bronchoscopists in their Interventional Pulmonary Department. [1] In this setting, the patients are usually under conscious sedation in a bronchoscopy suite, and cannot have an immediate surgical intervention performed regardless of the ROSE. In our institution, the majority of the EBUS-FNA procedures are performed under general anesthesia in the operating room by thoracic surgeons. This is advantageous in that it allows for the patient to proceed to mediastinoscopy if the findings at the time of ROSE are benign or indeterminate, while sparing those patients with malignancy from having a more invasive procedure. The surgeons at our institution rely on the ROSE and preliminary diagnosis to help with their intraprocedural clinical decision making on whether or not to convert to a mediastinoscopy, which is similar to the use of intraoperative frozen section. The decision-making algorithm used at our institution is summarized in [Figure 1] and has been previously published by our clinical colleagues. [2]
Figure 1: Clinical decision-making algorithm for patients with suspicious mediastinal lymphadenopathy utilizing EBUS-FNA (FDG = Fluorodeoxyglucose, PET = Positron emission tomography, ROSE = Rapid on-site evaluation)

Click here to view


The paper also states that the diagnostic yield does not differ in cases with or without ROSE. However, in our experience, the use of ROSE allows one to evaluate for adequacy and to triage the material appropriately, which is particularly important for cases with a suspected malignancy where ancillary studies, including immunostains, flow cytometry, and/or molecular studies are extremely important. [3] Being present at the time of ROSE allows the cytologist to request additional material when needed and to allocate dedicated passes for cell block to enrich the cellularity, once a diagnosis can be reached. For instance, when present at the EBUS-FNA, if the first pass shows metastatic carcinoma, then any additional material from other passes can be used to make a cell block. However, in the absence of ROSE, the clinicians may use valuable material to make additional unnecessary slides, which could compromise the cell block yield and lead to the inability to perform ancillary studies, if these are to be performed on the cell block. Table 5 in the paper by Carruth-Griffin A et al.[1] points out that the number of cases with cell block preparation was slightly higher in the subset of cases with ROSE (92% vs 88%) and that more of the cases with ROSE had immunostains performed (29% vs 15%), special stains performed (9% vs 3%), and flow cytometry performed (11% vs 0.6%). Furthermore, the authors point out that although there was a similar percent of malignant cases in the cases with and without ROSE, immunostains were utilized more in those cases with ROSE (63% vs 37%), as was flow cytometry (94% vs 6%). The increased use of ancillary studies in the group with ROSE may reflect a better diagnostic yield of material for ancillary studies, in comparison with the group without ROSE. This is an important point because of the increasing need to perform molecular testing on non-small-cell carcinomas of the lung, which have predictive and prognostic value, and are becoming increasingly more important for the management of these patients. Given that cytological specimens are criticized for not having sufficient material for these important tests, we have found that being present to appropriately allocate sufficient material in EBUS-FNA cases for the aforementioned tests is important at our institution. After all, establishing a diagnosis of malignancy is just one aspect of what we are being asked to provide in today's era of personalized medicine. If we are unable to go further and perform crucial ancillary studies and molecular tests, then we are not optimizing the EBUS-FNA procedure and we are potentially subjecting a patient to additional diagnostic procedures, which increases healthcare costs and decreases the quality of care for a patient. [4]

In conclusion, the utility of ROSE in EBUS-FNAs may differ based on who is performing the procedure (clinician/bronchoscopist vs thoracic surgeon) and the different treatment algorithms employed in different institutions. This is important as many institutions are now trying to establish their own protocols for dealing with these new cytological specimens, which will likely increase over time as more minimally invasive approaches replace more invasive and costly surgical procedures. In our EBUS-FNA experience, if there is a potential for following the procedure with surgery, such as mediastinoscopy, then the use of ROSE with a preliminary diagnosis can be crucial for appropriate patient care and has a similar role as frozen section evaluation. As the results of this informative article point out, perhaps each institution should critically analyze their own practice to determine how best to use ROSE in EBUS-FNAs.

 
 » References Top

1.Griffin AC, Schwartz LE, Baloch ZW. Utility of on-site evaluation of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration specimens. Cytojournal 2011;8:20.  Back to cited text no. 1
  Medknow Journal  
2.Gilbert S, Wilson DO, Christie NA, Luketich JD, Landreneau RJ, Close JM, et al. Should endobronchial ultrasonography be part of the thoracic surgeon's armamentarium? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:413-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
3.Monaco SE, Schuchert MJ, Khalbuss WE. Diagnostic difficulties and pitfalls in rapid on-site evaluation of endobronchial ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration. Cytojournal 2010;7:9.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
4.Clark DP. Seize the opportunity: underutilization of fine-needle aspiration biopsy to inform targeted cancer therapy decisions. Cancer 2009;117:289-97.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  


    Figures

  [Figure 1]

This article has been cited by
1 Diagnostic benefits and cost-effectiveness of on-site imprint cytology adequacy evaluation of core needle biopsies of bone lesions
Melanie J. Kubik,Amir Mohammadi,Marilin Rosa
Diagnostic Cytopathology. 2014; 42(6): 506
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Current status and clinical applicability of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration [Estado atual e aplicabilidade clínica da punção aspirativa por agulha guiada por ultrassom endobrônquico]
Figueiredo, V.R. and Jacomelli, M. and Rodrigues, A.J. and Canzian, M. and Cardoso, P.F.G. and Jatene, F.B.
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia. 2013; 39(2): 226-237
[Pubmed]
3 result 2 Document Announcement of first time Cytojournal impact factor for 2012 coincides with Cytojournal decade celebration (2004-2013)
Authors of Document Shidham, V.B., Demay, R.M.
CytoJournal. 2013;
[Pubmed]
4 result 1 Document Estado atual e aplicabilidade clínica da punção aspirativa por agulha guiada por ultrassom endobrônquico | [Current status and clinical applicability of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration]
Authors of Document Figueiredo, V.R., Jacomelli, M., Rodrigues, A.J., (...), Cardoso, P.F.G., Jatene, F.B.
Source of the Document Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia. 2013;
[Pubmed]



 

Top
Previous article Next article

    

  Site Map | Copyright and Disclaimer
© 2007 - CytoJournal | A journal by Cytopathology Foundation Inc with Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
New version online since 1st July '08
Open Access