Cytotechnologist on-site evaluation of pancreas fine needle aspiration adequacy: Comparison with cytopathologists and correlation with the final interpretation

Matthew T. Olson, Syed Z Ali

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective: To compare on-site evaluations of adequacy (OSEA) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas performed by cytotechnologists and cytopathologists. Study Design: A 10-year retrospective review of 2,426 OSEA from 2,223 procedures in 1,984 patients was performed. Adequacy statistics were calculated along with the accuracy of the OSEA for each OSEA provider. The effect of other variables, including the lifetime number of EUS pancreatic OSEA, the number of years of experience at the time of each case, the institutional number of EUS FNA, and the number of smears was evaluated with ANOVA. Results: There was no difference in the adequacy downgrade rate for cytotechnologists versus cytopathologists during this study period (38.2 vs. 32.2%, p = 0.13). Neither individual cytologist experience with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA (p = 0.25) nor years in practice (p = 0.86) was correlated with the accuracy of the OSEA. The experience of the institution with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA was correlated with both adequacy (p = 0.003) and accuracy (p = 0.000001). Conclusion: Cytotechnologists and cytopathologists are comparably accurate in OSEA of EUS-guided pancreatic FNA. The adequacy and accuracy of the OSEA increase with institutional experience, and this increase is not solely attributable to cytologist factors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)340-346
Number of pages7
JournalActa Cytologica
Volume56
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2012

Fingerprint

Fine Needle Biopsy
Pancreas
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
antineoplaston A10
Analysis of Variance

Keywords

  • Cytotechnologist
  • Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration
  • Fine needle aspiration
  • On-site evaluation of adequacy
  • Pancreas

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Histology

Cite this

@article{173a5d5ed4394f8aa90b3780fecce11e,
title = "Cytotechnologist on-site evaluation of pancreas fine needle aspiration adequacy: Comparison with cytopathologists and correlation with the final interpretation",
abstract = "Objective: To compare on-site evaluations of adequacy (OSEA) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas performed by cytotechnologists and cytopathologists. Study Design: A 10-year retrospective review of 2,426 OSEA from 2,223 procedures in 1,984 patients was performed. Adequacy statistics were calculated along with the accuracy of the OSEA for each OSEA provider. The effect of other variables, including the lifetime number of EUS pancreatic OSEA, the number of years of experience at the time of each case, the institutional number of EUS FNA, and the number of smears was evaluated with ANOVA. Results: There was no difference in the adequacy downgrade rate for cytotechnologists versus cytopathologists during this study period (38.2 vs. 32.2{\%}, p = 0.13). Neither individual cytologist experience with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA (p = 0.25) nor years in practice (p = 0.86) was correlated with the accuracy of the OSEA. The experience of the institution with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA was correlated with both adequacy (p = 0.003) and accuracy (p = 0.000001). Conclusion: Cytotechnologists and cytopathologists are comparably accurate in OSEA of EUS-guided pancreatic FNA. The adequacy and accuracy of the OSEA increase with institutional experience, and this increase is not solely attributable to cytologist factors.",
keywords = "Cytotechnologist, Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration, Fine needle aspiration, On-site evaluation of adequacy, Pancreas",
author = "Olson, {Matthew T.} and Ali, {Syed Z}",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1159/000338646",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "56",
pages = "340--346",
journal = "Acta Cytologica",
issn = "0001-5547",
publisher = "Science Printers and Publishers Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cytotechnologist on-site evaluation of pancreas fine needle aspiration adequacy

T2 - Comparison with cytopathologists and correlation with the final interpretation

AU - Olson, Matthew T.

AU - Ali, Syed Z

PY - 2012/8

Y1 - 2012/8

N2 - Objective: To compare on-site evaluations of adequacy (OSEA) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas performed by cytotechnologists and cytopathologists. Study Design: A 10-year retrospective review of 2,426 OSEA from 2,223 procedures in 1,984 patients was performed. Adequacy statistics were calculated along with the accuracy of the OSEA for each OSEA provider. The effect of other variables, including the lifetime number of EUS pancreatic OSEA, the number of years of experience at the time of each case, the institutional number of EUS FNA, and the number of smears was evaluated with ANOVA. Results: There was no difference in the adequacy downgrade rate for cytotechnologists versus cytopathologists during this study period (38.2 vs. 32.2%, p = 0.13). Neither individual cytologist experience with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA (p = 0.25) nor years in practice (p = 0.86) was correlated with the accuracy of the OSEA. The experience of the institution with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA was correlated with both adequacy (p = 0.003) and accuracy (p = 0.000001). Conclusion: Cytotechnologists and cytopathologists are comparably accurate in OSEA of EUS-guided pancreatic FNA. The adequacy and accuracy of the OSEA increase with institutional experience, and this increase is not solely attributable to cytologist factors.

AB - Objective: To compare on-site evaluations of adequacy (OSEA) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas performed by cytotechnologists and cytopathologists. Study Design: A 10-year retrospective review of 2,426 OSEA from 2,223 procedures in 1,984 patients was performed. Adequacy statistics were calculated along with the accuracy of the OSEA for each OSEA provider. The effect of other variables, including the lifetime number of EUS pancreatic OSEA, the number of years of experience at the time of each case, the institutional number of EUS FNA, and the number of smears was evaluated with ANOVA. Results: There was no difference in the adequacy downgrade rate for cytotechnologists versus cytopathologists during this study period (38.2 vs. 32.2%, p = 0.13). Neither individual cytologist experience with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA (p = 0.25) nor years in practice (p = 0.86) was correlated with the accuracy of the OSEA. The experience of the institution with EUS-guided pancreatic FNA was correlated with both adequacy (p = 0.003) and accuracy (p = 0.000001). Conclusion: Cytotechnologists and cytopathologists are comparably accurate in OSEA of EUS-guided pancreatic FNA. The adequacy and accuracy of the OSEA increase with institutional experience, and this increase is not solely attributable to cytologist factors.

KW - Cytotechnologist

KW - Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration

KW - Fine needle aspiration

KW - On-site evaluation of adequacy

KW - Pancreas

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864224512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84864224512&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1159/000338646

DO - 10.1159/000338646

M3 - Article

C2 - 22846449

AN - SCOPUS:84864224512

VL - 56

SP - 340

EP - 346

JO - Acta Cytologica

JF - Acta Cytologica

SN - 0001-5547

IS - 4

ER -